Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00101)

May 12 2000

Dear Aryel:

I see you place an emphasis on the word CONCEPTUALIZE.

With me, other than the dictionary meaning of this word, I am not
aware of any special emphasis or technical use of this word.  If
you are using it in such a way, enlighten me.

I will answer as though the word "conceptualize" means "to paint
a mental picture."

It (to conceptualize) is an act of WILL, used by the REAL
MAN/EGO/BUDDHI-MANAS. to 1.   perceive the incoming messages from
our senses (gnyan-indriyas), or 2.   Generate its own ideas
(concepts) and project them outward through the senses of action
(speech, writing, acts, etc...) (karma-indriyas).

To me, all that we contact through the physical senses, or
generate as ideas (concepts) are translated by the physical brain
into electro-magnetic patterns; and thus the ASTRAL BRAIN picks
them up and translates or mirrors them (through the medium of the
embodied mind (Kama-Manas) to the REAL MAN  (EGO--Higher Manas or
BUDDHI-MANAS).

This REAL MAN is a portion of the eternal PERCEIVER -- (ATMA - a
"Ray" of the Universal Spirit enshrined in our innermost core as
the MONAD in manifestation through US).  [ It is the eternal
MONAD -- SD I 174-5fn -- which is the core of our REAL SELF
(Atma-Buddhi-Manas) -- SD II 70, 167.

To me the teachings of Theosophy (that we can read in the
original literature provided by HPB as Messenger of the Masters),
that we can then think about and meditate upon, or discuss with
others (as we are doing now) are both their physical record and
the inner imperishable record made in the
Akasa (Mulaprakriti or "Root-Matter").  In any case we, as the
MIND BEING, are able to consider these "concepts" and compare
them with what we already know of Theosophy or through our mental
experience and memory.  These are always limited in scope by the
quality of our "embodied-mind" or Kama-Manas that is active on
this plane working through the astral and physical senses.

We are all limited by the physical aspect of our life that
requires such constant (even if almost instantaneous)
transmissions and translations.  So long as we believe (conceive)
that we are personalities only and that we live only one life, we
will find our views limited by that.

If (through the study and use of the teachings of Theosophy) we
are able to perceive (conceive) that there is a VIEWER, a
PERCEIVER, a PERMANENT and REAL MAN within each of us -- that
surveys the information that the physical man send in,  we will
establish an independent and impersonal basis for critical
consideration of all data.

This is not limited to the impressions going in, or coming out.
But includes a wider, deeper and far more philosophical and
logical basis -- as a deep conviction of the exactitude of the
THREE FUNDAMENTALS of theosophy ( SD I  pp. 14-18).

Such a basis would provide us with a reference point other than
the mere incoming perceptions and our memories of earlier study
and training in organizing academic instruction and tuition.  It
would provide us with a critical base from which to evaluate the
accuracy of those same academic tuitions and teachings against
the background of Nature, her Laws and the facts of our own
Existence, as MIND-BEINGS living in a physical universe of
sensations.

Having said this, let me put some NOTES in the body of your
message, if you will let me.

Best wishes,

Dallas



D T B


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

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com]On Behalf Of
ASANAT@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 4:50 PM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com; dalval@nwc.net; act-l@list.vnet.net
Cc: rodakjl@pcola.gulf.net; csanabri@skadden.com;
nppress@vais.net;
averea@juno.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World FW: MONADS IN EVOLUTION Part I

-------------------------------------------

Dear Dallas,

A	Your statement seems to state that Theosophy consists of a
series of
CONCEPTUAL tenets that are devised by the analytical mind, and
addressed to
the analytical mind.  If this is what you intend, it is in direct
contradiction with what HPB & her teachers said, over & over
again:  In order
to even BEGIN to study theosophy (not capitalized, since
theosophy is not a
conceptual system, according to HPB & her Masters),

DTB	This statement I do not understand.  How "contradict ?"


A	there MUST be regeneration, transformation, initiation.  Your
statement, however, does not
mention transformation at all.  It therefore assumes that a mere
acknowledgment and acceptance by the analytical mind is all that
is required.

DTB	No.  I would also include critical evaluation.


a	 As I have shown in my paper TRANSFORMATION:  VITAL ESSENCE OF
HPB'S SECRET DOCTRINE, according to HPB & the Masters, theosophy
is that which takes place
in theosophical, divine-like, states of awareness.

DTB	I would say that these states of awareness are both:  1.
immediate,  and 2.  the fruit of chosen deep thought
(MEDITATION).

A	If there are no theosophical states of awareness, there is no
theosophy.

DTB	I am not sure I understand this.  THEOSOPHY as a statement of
Facts in Nature, as the History of our evolution and research
into their logic and accuracy (impacted in the imperishable
AKASA) exists independently of our own thinking (or mediation, or
initiation, etc...)


A	Therefore, ANY presentation of theosophy MUST state clearly and
unambiguously that there
must be transformation in order to understand anything
theosophically.  If it
does not do that, it is not a theosophical presentation,
according to HPB & the Masters.
Your statement (and ANY statement which claims theosophy can ever
be a
CONCEPTUAL system) is at severe variance with what HPB & the
Masters taught,
unless I have myself severely misunderstood the many quotes I
provide in my
work.

DTB	Forgive my ignorance, but I have not read your essay and
work. I therefore deal with what you write here only.  Obviously
I must have some other view and use words in a way different from
your application.  Perhaps mine (so far the product of nearly 60+
years of study), needs revision and inclusion of some of your
concepts, ideas -- which I am seeking to understand.  I do not
consider myself "time-bound."

Nor do I believe that I would place unreserved trust on the
interpretation given my modern translators of ancient texts. The
fresh material of Buddhist, Japanese, etc... literature ought to
be considered with caution.

1.	First are we so sure that the texts we look at are totally
accurate as to the original way they were recorded by the
teachers of those?

2.	Second.  Are the translators of today unbiased and reliable as
to their understanding and choice of words to convey metaphysical
ideas ?

3.	Are the translators familiar with theosophical teachings?

4.	Has an effort been made to consider such new translations in
the light of theosophy ?

I hold that Theosophy does provide us with the necessary basis to
consider critically the value of any text, ancient or modern.
The universal MORAL BASIS is an essential one.  If the
transformation of man is to be accomplished by the subduing of
the Kama (desire and passion) principle, then are we sure that
those texts, and those translators, have placed themselves in a
position to do this faithfully ?
Theosophy as stated in the VOICE OF THE SILENCE is essentially
the HEART DOCTRINE.

It affords no room for the Personality to present its limited and
selfish view-points.  It demands the clarity and accuracy of
Universal Principles -- that all may recognize them and see them
present there, -- or, their absence.  That is a very tough set of
criteria.


A	The very many references I offer, however, suggest rather
strongly
that theosophy is not, and cannot be, a conceptual system.
Conceptual presentations of theosophy WERE given to VICTORIANS at
the time of
HPB, since Victorians did not have the means to know any better.

DTB	I do not subscribe to the idea that language alone, whether
"Victorian English," or the English of any period conveys
meanings that are today obscure or limited or are anything else
than attempts made to offer such facts as can be grasped by the
average intelligent person who has devoted some time to the study
and acquisition of a facility with Theosophy.  Would we then
exclude Newton, Bacon, Shakespeare, Tennyson, Kipling, Arnold,
Browning, and a host of other writers -- because of the era of
their writing ?  I think not.


A	But now that we have access to such insights as come from
schools like Zen & Tibetan
Buddhism (both of which are specifically singled out by the
Masters as
ESOTERIC, & therefore as THEOSOPHICAL); now that we have access
to so many
developments in psychology (which were originally inspired by the
theosophical movement, as I show in my work), and that other
schools have
pointed to the need for transformation (such as the Gurdjieff
schools); now
that J. Krishnamurti has been here, showing more clearly than had
ever been
done before the urgent necessity for transformation if humanity
is to go
anywhere meaningful & productive, it seems like a colossal,
inappropriate
waste of time & effort to continue grinding such old corn at that
Victorian
mill.

DTB	I am not of the opinion that any of the above-mentioned
considerations resulting from the current interpretations of Zen
texts, Tibetan texts, Gurdjieff or Krishnamurti have altered the
basis of Theosophical teachings.

I am incompetent to state that HPB and the Masters (writing over
110 years ago) are, because of the elapsed period, "obscure."  I
have no proven facts before me to show that modernity in
expression alone provides veracity and accuracy to views, and
concepts.  But, then I may be wrong in holding to such an
opinion.


A	But despite the presence of "tenets" for the benefit of
transformation-challenged Victorians in the early days, it is a
FACT that the
Masters always made it crystal clear that theosophy CANNOT happen
unless
there is initiation, transformation.  That I show -- I think,
beyond a shadow
of a doubt -- in my work.  Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

DTB	To me, the study, meditation, (initiation --- (into what ?),
understanding that arises from considering of the doctrines and
tenets of the ORIGINAL THEOSOPHY of HPB and the Masters is most
important.

If we do not have those as our basis and background, and if we
are not well schooled in understanding the psychology of
brotherhood, cooperation, and inter-action on all levels of being
that Theosophy illustrates and discusses, we will indeed be
talking at cross-purposes.


A	Our understanding of what theosophy is, is what is at stake
here, not anyone's particular perception of this.  My paper can
be found at:  teosofia.com, which is Rodolfo Don's web page.

DTB	Thank you, I will visit that and look it over.


A	If you are correct that theosophy is a CONCEPTUAL system, then
HPB & the
Masters must have been totally wrong, in the many references I
provide, which
comprise the entire corpus of HPB's work, including the letters
from the Masters.

DTB	You are using the word "conceptual" in a specific way, which
remains non-defined to me.

To me THEOSOPHY is

1.  A record of the History of research in Nature  -- in all her
departments.  [ SD I 272-3 ].

The basic thesis is that NATURE already contains everything.  She
guides the whole universe in an intelligent and lawful manner so
that the most minute of her components as well as the greatest on
all planes of being are integrated and ever interactive with the
rest.  (SD I 618-634 will be found to posit that the MONADS are
all such infinitely small parts of NATURE, and that they all
mirror and interact with each-other).

The universal morality of cooperation and co-existence demands
that there be no authoritative, selfish or arbitrary pressure
placed by any one (or group) of beings on any one (or others) of
those in existence.

This is a basic expression of KARMA -- brotherhood, harmlessness,
co-operation, service.

It is also the basis for self-reform, as each "human" Monad seeks
to "widen out" to the Universal ONE SOURCE from which it came and
to which it now is in the process of return.  In so doing it
serves the educative aspect of life and draws along with it other
Monads of lesser experience.  By analogy we might say:  Just as
we are drawn along by those MONADS of very great experience (whom
we might mentally designate as an HPB, or the Masters, and the
Buddhas and Dhyan Chohans)  [ see SD I 570-575 ].

2.  A method of self-teaching, self-reform (morally), and of
self-development is implied in every tenet and doctrine of
Theosophy.

Theosophy is not a fossilized set of teachings.  It is living.
It is dynamic.

Theosophy views US (each one of us) as the growing tips of those
improvements in the living of Mankind (as a whole) that its
doctrines can provide a guidance for.  In SD I 207-10 we are
given as an illustration the existence and purpose of ONE who
serves to epitomize the excellence of such a dedication and
devotion to duty, and to the service of the whole of a World to
every human, as to every other being on it.

In the process that which is obscure opens before us as we probe
the illustrations and analogies of the past in terms of the
present.

But the impersonal and universal TOUCHSTONE remains, always.  Are
they not the statements concerning the foundations of the
UNIVERSE, of NATURE, and of Man -- as the essential transforming
agent -- because in him resides the imperishable Pilgrim, the
very active and creative MIND?


A	Please enlighten me.
Aryel


DTB	Dear Aryel:

I do not know how well I can present my views but I can only try
to make my position clear.

If there is some ambiguity then let us go at it again.

thanks for this opportunity

Best wishes to you,

Dallas  (May 12)


-------------------------------

In a message dated 4/24/00 9:59:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

dalval@nwc.net writes:

<< The following are a few fundamental propositions of Theosophy:

    Fundamental ideas in Theosophy

 1.  The SPIRIT in man is the only real and permanent part of his
 being; the rest of his nature being  compounded  of 7 aspects
 called "principles. These include wisdom, the Mind, the
Emotions,
 vitality, a model body (called the Astral Body) and finally the
 physical form we all know.

 2.  Since change and decay is incident to all composite things,
 everything in man but his Spirit is impermanent. This Unit has
 been named the "Monad" in THE SECRET DOCTRINE.  In terms of the
 "Principles" of man it is:  Atma-Buddhi (Spirit--Discernment --
 or Wisdom)  with it, as a link to the 'personality,' is the Mind
 (Manas).

 3.  Further, the universe being is actually ONE thing and not
 diverse, and everything within it being connected with the
whole,
 and with every other thing therein, of which upon the upper
plane
 (below referred to ) there is a perfect knowledge, the whole
 Universe is made up of an infinity of Monad each at its own
stage
 of evolution.  These are immortal, eternal Units of Life.  The
 evolutionary process in our Universe includes every one of
these.
 Cooperation is the rule of Law,  and this makes up the "field"
of
 circumstance and experience that we call the Law of Kama.

 4.  No act or thought occurs without each portion of the great
 whole
 perceiving and noting it. Hence all are inseparably bound
 together by the tie of Brotherhood.  The "Monads" all around us
 are immediately impressed with our feelings, actions, thoughts
 and words.  Being so "impressed" they become the conveyors of
our
 personal "Karma."  >>


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