Theos-Talk Archives (November 2000 Message tt00205)

Gene,

You have put it pretty much as I see it too. There are arguements 
that lead to proofs both extreme views, eternalism and nihlism, that 
is why the middle way is so important. So we are left with cause and 
effect in the end to work with. With consciousness as a form of 
energy, perhaps the highest form of energy, what is there to do with 
it? Every time we get a new idea of our self we undergo a profound 
transformation and awakening. The parts of the old self that are no 
longer part of the present pattern of consciousness fall away like 
dead leaves. The primary cause of all this "Something" coming into 
manifestation is dependence upon the false cognition that there is 
an "I" somewhere. Now this can provoke major insecurity, but the 
question does come down to whether "I" exist or not? Am "I" something?

Theosophy places ATMAN at the pinnacle of the chain of Principals 
which apparently it must in order to complete a logical system of 
thought. But the reality is That it is completely dynamic and as you 
describe it, in constant oscillation. I totally agree. I have long 
regarded the human body and the brain in particular as a resonant 
receptor of the oceanic oscillating soup of energy that we float 
within. We can use our bodies to attune to various frequencies of 
resonant energies. We can build instruments to extend the sense 
objects beyond physical limitations. But ... when we turn 
consciousness upon the very nature of consciousness things turn into 
"no things" and we find emptyness. And yet in that emptyness infinite 
manifestations are seen to constantly arise as phenomena. And what of 
those subtle forms of consciousness that transcend bodily death and 
are drawn on to karmic re-embodiment. What is it hold the karmic 
charge? If it is dark matter that could be a pretty scary thought. 
Upon what is this subtle consciousness dependent upon? Perhaps it is 
only dependent on the element of space, primordial unobstructed space 
that has no bounds, is undestructible, unconquerable, and without end 
in extension in all directions.

Theosophy does not have a very good philosophical method to explain 
the dynamic nature of reality as a method of discourse. Certainly not 
like the Buddhist traditions have developed. And Theosophy doesn't 
prescribe any course of practice other than a set of ethical codes of 
conduct. Excellent enough for sure, but Theosophy DOES hold open a 
mighty door for those interested enough to allow their intuition to 
lead them on the way through. It is sound preparation for the Mind 
and really that is what we are really trying to get at, preparing the 
Mind to be a well trained tool in the service of all beings. The 
untrained mind, creates such a mess of suffering and misery.

My notes and books are not at hand or I would throw some other 
interesting formula back to you for consideration.

Warmest regards friend,
Sherab


--- In theos-talk@egroups.com, "Eugene Carpenter" <Ecarpent@c...> 
wrote:
> Thankyou,
> 
> I think you are correct.
> 
> There is the question: Why is there something rather than nothing?
> 
> It seems that the real question might be:
> Why does there seem to be something rather than nothing?
> 
> I have been working with the hypothesis that it is all nothing and 
that
> Total Unconditioned Consciousness knows this. This nothing, it 
would seem,
> is one nothing, if we were to count it.
> 
> Then there is this dilemna: It is nothing but it is one nothing. 
This sets
> up an oscillation in the mind or perhaps this sets up the basic 
oscillation
> that is the mind. This oscillation, vibration, sound, light, etc. 
then
> manifests the nothing and it's oneness alternately, so one, 
essentially
> nothing at all, is oscillating, employing time and space to 
perceive "self",
> etc.
> 
> ALL falls into various frequencies of oscillation and ALL rises 
again into
> the higher frequencies and there is the chance of transcendending 
the whole
> oscillating system(through integration of the system, i.e. through 
the love
> of the heart)(this takes profound will) and then getting a chance 
to rest
> deeply before getting drawn into the whole system once again, 
falling,
> becoming involved, and thinking one's way back out again. It is 
like trying
> to solve the liar's paradox or any self-referencing statement with 
the mind
> alone.
> 
> "This statement is false."
> 
> If true it is false. If false its is true.
> 
> True, false, true, false. This causes oscillation in the mind. No
> mind-like machine can be built that can resolve this oscillation.
> 
> A meaningful statement can be true or false or contingent. This 
statement
> seems meaningful but is oscillating and Spencer-Brown points out 
that it is
> "imaginary" and analogous to the mathematically meaningful 
statement:
> 
> x = -1/x
> 
> x^2 = the square root of -1
> 
> x = i (oscillating plus one, minus one)
> 
> This brings time into the system wherein before the system was 
logical and
> "outside" or transcendent to time.
> 
> Therefore, trying to follow Spencer-Brown, a meaningful statement 
can be
> true, false, contingent or. . . . . TA DA! . . . . Imaginary!( 
watch out
> for the potential semantic trap here)
> 
> This is where we can all put our heads and hearts together and 
dismiss this
> as a waste- of- time- to- think- about or hopefully, for my little 
ego, the
> key to solving the mysteries of the universe.
> 
> If there were only one state of consciousness then there would be 
nothing
> else. But, whenever there are at least two different states of
> consciousness then there are three and then zillionions.(and you 
thought
> rabbits were. . .) Whenever the heart is unable to re-integrate 
the mind
> then we fall. When the heart and love can re-integrate the mind, 
we rise
> again into the bossum of the ALL-MIGHTY ONE. One learns ever-more 
through
> periodically suffering this.
> 
> I can only write this in relation to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Gene
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Compiler" <compiler@w...>
> To: <theos-talk@egroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 7:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Point of view- THIS is a Classic 
example
> 
> 
> > 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@w...>
> > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >