Theos-Talk Archives (November 2000 Message tt00190)

Eugene,

Maybe these thoughts that you generated in me by your ideas might be
useful, if valid in any way, according to the Theosophical teachings, for
those more knowledgeable to assist us all with:

It would seem that "substance" is the other side of the great unconditioned
"All" when it is stirred up, as in vibrational, by the force of thinking,
so that relationships can then be experienced through all the phenomea
(which is this substance in motion) on all of the many "conditioned" planes
of existence that come into existence, are experienced through, and then
fade away leaving each thinker with the "experience" gained for the
particular cycle, until the next one begins.

Compiler
-------

Eugene Carpenter wrote:

> If Total Unconditioned Consciousness and Bare Subjectivity
>
> is all there is,
>
> then what is substance?
>
> Could it be that substance is the under-standing of the above?
>
> Wouldn't under-standing the above take time and space?
>
> Are we not Total Consciousness and Bare Subjectivity
>
> gradually understanding who we are?
>
> Gene
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sherab Dorje" <sherab@wenet.net>
> To: <theos-talk@egroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 9:46 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Point of view- THIS is a Classic example
>
> > There is a one to one correspondence with your quote below,
> > > that "The Universe is Embodied Consciousness" --
> > > on every possible plane.
> > and the quote that I posted earlier in this discussion that is
> > attributed to Lord Maitreya,
> > "Nothing exists apart from the Mind,
> > Awareness eventually comes to realize this."
> >
> > One could also say in equal truth, Consciousness is the Universe or
> > that the Universe is Conscious. Either way, there is no getting
> > around the truth that all is in Mind. Awareness is That, embodied or
> > not. It is the non-recognition of that intrinsic awareness that
> > brings about the embodiment.
> >
> > As to whether this is helpful to readers or not would be hard to
> > determine. If there is some juice in a thread then will get legs and
> > have some participation. If one is drawn to this forum then they are
> > drawn to the Mysteries, that much we have in common. To invoke the
> > Mysteries is to evoke the metaphysical dyanmic between the student
> > and the teacher, the disciple and the guru, the chela and the chohan,
> > the novice and the lama, in other words to teach and to learn.
> >
> > Thank you for your comments. There are many discussions taking place
> > here but not all that I can participate in.
> >
> > Sherab
> >
> > --- In theos-talk@egroups.com, Compiler <compiler@w...> wrote:
> > > Sherab,
> > >
> > > This may or may not be helpful to some readers:
> > >
> > > As I read all of the stimulating scientific discussions here, and
> > not
> > > personally having a scientific or scholarly bent, just being a
> > student who
> > > is a theosophic generalist, so to say, in trying to understand it
> > all, I
> > > keep clearly in the front of my mind at all times the fundamental
> > > Theosophic statement, assuming that it is true, until proven
> > otherwise,
> > > that "The Universe is Embodied Consciousness" -- on every possible
> > plane.
> > >
> > > Compiler
> > > -------
> > >
> > > Sherab Dorje wrote:
> > >
> > > > Discussion indeed! Thank you for your stimulating questions and
> > > > thoughts.
> > > >
> > > > First, some thoughts about Sham's questions after sleeping on
> > them.
> > > > Good questions require good answers and having just read LMH's
> > > > posting on this subject that needs sometime to digest.
> > > >
> > > > Given that there is no way to separate the Mind from the
> > awareness of
> > > > phenomena what can we understand about these differing points of
> > > > view. Western science regards consciousness as a phenomena giving
> > it
> > > > substantial form, where as, spiritually regarded, mind appears as
> > an
> > > > infinitely empty container in which all phenomena manifest and has
> > > > certain inherent qualities.
> > > >
> > > > There appears to be no problem with regarding inter-molecular
> > space
> > > > as a kind of primordial substance. What appears to awareness, be
> > that
> > > > iron or emptyness is really a matter of the state of awareness, or
> > > > state of mind. Substance appears as a state of consciousness. In
> > that
> > > > as consciousness unfolds or the state of mind changes, as in
> > death,
> > > > then what follows is a change in the appearance of phenomena or
> > > > substance. As human beings, we are subjects within certain realms
> > > > where substances conform to their karmic causes. I believe that
> > this
> > > > is what HPB refers to as the limits beyond which we can go not. If
> > > > there is any way to characterize HPB's work, it is that she is
> > > > showing us the naked reality of our consciousness and asking us to
> > > > examine That.
> > > >
> > > > This does not preclude or exclude the consciousness of beings that
> > > > exist at other energetic frequencies or interpenetrating planes of
> > > > being and that are subject to their corresponding realms that are
> > > > just as substantial as iron is in our realm though those
> > substances
> > > > may appear to us as space in our realm. So nothing exists apart
> > from
> > > > the mind, regardless of whatever state the mind is in.
> > > >
> > > > Another approach we may take to analyze this is to regard
> > phenomena
> > > > as effect produced by a cause. Force, must be the sensible
> > > > appearance of this process, the movement of energetic flux, of
> > > > manifestation or pralaya due to cause. Phenomena appears due to
> > cause
> > > > and when the cause is removed the phenomena disappears without a
> > > > trace. This also applies to the mind and its state. Different
> > states
> > > > of Mind come about because of causes so it follows that in other
> > > > states of Mind different phenomena and substance will arise in
> > > > awareness.
> > > >
> > > > It is not my intent to flippantly reduce the wealth of knowledge
> > > > revealed by science to mere mental clutter, that would be
> > > > disrespectful nor is it my intent to reduce spiritual views of
> > Mind
> > > > to an unregardable eternalist view. Science is an ego, an "I" that
> > > > wants to always box things in or find smaller and smaller
> > > > compartments of usefully quantifiable corresponding information.
> > It
> > > > does this by generating them with concepts, mental constructs.
> > When
> > > > one box of concept is complete another larger box is under
> > > > development somewhere else. The question, is this, are we just
> > > > creating more causes for a larger universe or universes? And if
> > so,
> > > > then we must examine the motivation for producing these causes.
> > That
> > > > line of questioning ultimately leads back to the purpose of being
> > > > human. This, I regard, as the highest Theosophical duty.
> > > >
> > > > It is a real pleasure to take part in such a stimulating
> > > > converstation. More on this thread later.
> > > >
> > > > Sherab
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>