Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00154)

April 16th 1999

Dallas inserts some NOTES below

Thanks,	Dal


              Dallas TenBroeck
               dalval@nwc.net

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


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of Gerald
Schueler
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 6:19 AM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Response to Dallas


>>As I have noticed several times, once that we broaden our
definitions there is a greater coincidence noticed.>>

Agreed. I have noticed this also.


<<However in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY you will find that HPB narrows
and
defines the actual functions of the Theosophical principles and
assigns
reasons for those.  Also in FIVE YEARS OF THEOSOPHY will be found
an
article of hers on the SEVEN PRINCIPLES which antecedes the
publishing
of the KEY.  In that the 7 principles are discussed from the
point of
view of the Hindu schools and their basis is amply explained.>>

Dallas, the whole 7 principles doctrine is what is called
reductionism.  It is ok up to a point, but misleading because
no one of these principles really work alone, and they
actually function together as a network in very complex
ways. When I said that imagination is in buddhi, for
example, I automatically assume that atma is included
because buddhi can't do anything at all without atma.

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

DALLAS:	I AM NOT SURE IF "reductionism" is either "good or
bad" -- it is immaterial, (to me) because if Theosophy is a
SCIENCE, then the basics to be used in its applications would be
FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS.  Are those "propositions" so universal that
they may be accepted as a starting basis, which all can observe ?

Language is of course a trap as each one who uses it, employs it
with meanings that suit their own basis of self-development.  But
if that can be set aside, how are we to secure a common basis for
the exchange of ideas about fundamental propositions and observed
Laws of Nature ?

Like any of the "factual" physical sciences:  Mathematics,
Chemistry, Physics, Engineering, there are certain basics that
all accept and use as a universal method for communicating.

Mathematics is the tool that expresses most observations and
relationships as laws in Nature, when certain conditions are used
as an acceptable and universal, basic point of departure.
Chemistry, Physics and Engineering are all based on experiment
and observation of those Natural Laws that operate in material
nature, and, in their respective spheres of study, and they
interpenetrate each other, being both independent and dependent.
Mathematics synthesizes and provides a universal basis (and a
language) on which theory and observation are both racked.

If it can be granted that Theosophy, as the ANTIQUE SCIENCE, and
the PERENNIAL PHILOSOPHY is such a synthesizing basis, then the
FUNDAMENTAL PROPOSITIONS that is advances cease to be matters of
adjustment and tinkering, and become axioms that can be used
universally to study the psychology of SCIENCE, as it relates
through the various departments of observation, to actual usage.
Theosophy is a modern expression of the psychology of the
Universal Soul, of that which pervades Nature, and of which we
are also a vital part.  Of special value is the ethical/moral
component that is generally neglected in the other Sciences.  By
this I mean the answer to a question such as:  "Of what value to
humanity at large is "such and such" an experiment or result ?"

If on the other hand we regard Theosophy as a speculative
science, then all its statements, terms and concepts are for-ever
made to shift this way and that.  Under such a concept, they
would show no more stability than the speculative sciences,
constantly under development through study and observation, of
psychology, linguistics, history, paleontology, and the
evolutionary sciences that are based purely on such artifacts as
are deemed suitable to meeting the pre-conceptions of certain
accepted theories of evolution.  In other words these are areas
of uncertainty, revision and constant development, that are
curiously hampered by the predilections and prejudices of its
major exponents.

I say this as clearly as I can, since much time is spent in
comparing current ideas that are under development with the main
theosophical Principles which have been established by untold
centuries and millennia of observation, experiment and usage in
the college of Adepts, and their Disciples.  I am aware that this
represents something that our academies do not recognize, since
they are not aware of its existence, and also, they are assisting
it in their own series of observations and the resulting Laws of
Nature that they are constantly refining and defining -- if we
take the whole of nature into account.

Nature is the same for us all, and Science and its experiments
provide those results when true that are adding to the total
knowledge of all.

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


>>While Jung and others of our modern psychologists approach to
the
theosophical teachings in more than one way, they have failed to
take
full advantage (in my esteem ) of the information that is age-old
and
amply demonstrated.>>

Jung only included material that he observed in his work and
left most other stuff as speculation. However, his archetypes
would
certainly equate with atma. Today we have Ken Wilber
and others who are, in fact, using much of the esoteric
doctrines from the East.

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

THAT IS VALUABLE TO KNOW  SOMEONE OUGHT TO WRITE ON THIS FOR US
ALL

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


>>As far as I can see, the faculty of imagination (and Patanjali
also says this ) is seated in Manas and not in Buddhi.  To
Imagination, Buddhi would passive. >>

Atma-buddhi is our spiritual monad or "ray" from the divine
monad. It contains imagination when this is defined as
our ability to produce images (and sounds). It also contains
the intuition or ability to become consciously aware of
things that physically would be impossible (noetic). But
our consciousness normally works through manas, and
here our buddhic images become cluttered with thoughts.
When we raise consciousness from manas
(mental plane) to buddhi (causal plane) we can directly
experience images without thoughts (which are but images
clothed in words or language). When chelas begin to
meditate, such as Patanjali teaches, they begin from
manas, which is to say from where they already are.
They begin with imagination focused in manas, or images
clothed in words and languages. The goal is to
gradually eliminate the clothing and observe images
and/or sounds directly (thus raising consciousness
from manas to buddhi).  This is all pretty esoteric
stuff and hard for me to put into words, but I hope that
you can see where I am coming from here. We do
have imagination in manas, but its source, our ability
to form images and sounds, is in atma-buddhi and
when imagination is in manas, it is always associated
with thoughts, words, language, etc. This has the
advantage of being more detailed, but the disadvantage
of being muddled or sullied by our personality.

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

DALLAS	AGREED,  perhaps more simply we could say that ATMA the
individual 'Ray" of the ONE SPIRIT  (ATMAN ) which is universally
present, acts in and through Man, as an INDIVIDUALITY, so that
the independence of the learning pupil (the PERSONALITY) is
sustained and maintained for the cooperative benefit of the whole
of Nature's existence.  The various principles, then are the
several bases for observation and action.

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


>> In terms of INSPIRATION or of INTUITION it offers universal
and
sublime ideas for the attention of the embodied mind--which if
employed
would result in IDEAL ACTIONS AND RESULTS.  That embodied mind
(Kama-manas) then has the option of using or rejecting them -- so
Karma
results from that action.<<

OK. But what do you mean by "ideal actions?"  Are these
"good" deeds? Or are these deeds that produce no karma?
It seems that you mean good deeds that produce good
karma (i.e., golden chains). This should be a natural
byproduct of our development, not a specific goal (which
would be spiritual selfishness).

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

DALLAS	IDEAL ACTIONS, to me would be those that are regulated by
an active concern for the help or confusion that is imposed on
others by any choice that we the independent PERSONALITY may
make, and its subsequent development of either assistance or
resistance in surrounding affected nature.  It is the
"moral/ethical" effect of any choice made while living.

All choice that result from thought to action affect other beings
either for their benefit or for their obstruction.  Hence only
those actions that are performed in harmony (and with knowledge
or wisdom of their sensitive existence) can be so designed that
they are "karmaless."  And, I think that is almost impossible.
Hence the injunction that we do "good" deeds -- those that are
basically unselfish, and for the "good of all creatures."

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

Most of Patanjali, as I understand it, has to do with
purifying kama-manas and then raising consciousness
to buddhi-manas and then to atma-buddhi. He discusses
two degrees of samadhi: the lower is with residuals
and the higher is without.  The lower is atma-buddhi
and the higher is pure atma or possibly para-atma.
Unfortunately, he also goes on at great length
discussing siddhas or powers that  can be gained
from samyama. These should not be taken literally
but are true in a psychological sense.

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

DALLAS	What you say is quite correct and the Yoga-Sutras of
Patanjali are classified as "Tantras" of the "Right-Hand
Path." -- practiced by the "Dakshinachariyas."

The SIDDHAS as I understand are the "powers" that are developed
without special effort in the "pupil" as he progresses on the
path to Wisdom and universal service.  They are developed,
recognized and lie dormant until needed by another Yogi and for a
universally important reason.  If ever used personally, they are
"lost" to that disciple. I deduce that their use is only
permissible if there is a universally beneficial reason for their
exercise.

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


I prefer Buddhist yoga to Patanjali, but this is my own
personal preference. However, I have used the AUM
or OM mantra sucessfully. When you do this, the sound
can take consciousness into atma-buddhi, its source,
and the trip is easier each time it is done.

Jerry S


THANKS AND BEST WISHES

DALLAS	April 16th 1999
















































-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.