RE: Resp.to Dallas AND D. TO G.
Jan 31, 2001 12:03 PM
Tuesday, January 30, 2001
Some notes below.
From: Gerald Schueler [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 1:31 PM
To: Theosophy Study List
Subject: Response to Dallas
>>DTB SINCE the term "MAGE" or "MAGICIAN" implies a
full knowledge of the factors involved, only the Magician would
use such a
power if it was necessary, others like: "The Sorcerer's
certainly is my own stage, as I look at it) might use such a
power at the
beginning in imitation or out of curiosity -- and be totally
results, or not know how to stop it. It is for such cases I say
what I do.
I don't want to be ever put into a position where I am so
ignorant as to
tamper with imponderables I cannot manage -- and that is
caution -- and
"fear," if you please.
Jerry responds: I only wish that magicians were are
mature as you think they should be. But your argument
here misses my point - one should not be told to NOT
practice astral traveling or any other type of magic
out-of-hand like G de Purucker taught. There is
nothing wrong with not doing so if you don't want to,
and if you think you're not ready, then to do it would
be stupid. I simply disagree with the Theosophical
position that just because it is dangerous we should
avoid it. That attitude makes us a bunch of ostriches.
Also, astral traveling is something that we all do
automatically anyway, and it just makes good sense
to learn how to do it consciously.
DTB Theosophy does not demand, as I see it, that we
"follow" any particular group or person except H.P.B. - who was
the :"Messenger" who brought the Masters' message to us -- to
read and think over and discuss if we want to.
What I mean is that we ought to go straight to H.P.B.'s writings
if we want to know what THEOSOPHY has to say on a subject. If we
choose some interpreter, for whatever reason, all we get is his
or her opinion as to what THEOSOPHY means to them. It is NOT
WHAT H.P.B. TRANSMITTED. It is an OPINION. And I include myself
in this also, since there are probably a 1000 things that are
more subtle which H.P.B. covers than I do with my limited
Going to the "FUNDAMENTALS -- I mean H.P.B.'s FUNDAMENTALS -- is
the only safe way.
But to place anyone's interpretation as the best would (to my
mind) be making a selection which shuts out the ORIGINAL. I
prefer to go to that "original" and do my own study and thinking
on what I find and correlate there.
There is no question of who is right or wrong. Results arise
because of our selection. No one is either a beginner or an
So why the simile of "ostriches?" A mathematician always
employs the original basis of calculation == are we going to call
him an "ostrich?" when he uses calculus or spherical geometry ?
>> DTB I REFER TO THE DIFFERENCE between KAMA and BUDDHI or
passion and wisdom,
in one's development. The Motive is all important.. Is it
selfish or selfless?
Jerry: Both kama and buddhi can have altruistic motives.
Many Theosophists distrust their own kama to the point
of obsession. The only think "wrong" with the kama
traveling is that everything is colored/tinted with
one's own kama, but this is not so bad if one is
aware of it. Personally, I use Buddhi.
<< Crowley, (so far as I have been able to determine, certainly
exhibit anything rare and wonderful of the kind that might
inspire one to
the highest spiritual attainments possible.>>
Jerry: If you think this, then you should ignore his
works. He won't be offended.
>> DTB GEMATRIA and TEMURAH apparently relate to the
transmission of secret information among the early Rabbis and the
and the history of those are confused because of the many breaks
introduced historically in them. No, this is not mathematical or
gymnastics. It relates , as I see it, more to the securing of a
described condition of
spiritual improvement than any self-gratification.>>
Jerry: If you can find "spiritual improvement" in gematria,
then you are far superior to my humble efforts. My
research suggests to me that gematria is a lot like
statistics - you can use it to demonstrate just
about anything. I use it extensively in my magic
books, but as a fun thing rather than a spiritual
>> DTB H.P.B. indicates certain limits in the
"dimensions" we can access (S.D. I 251-2 (will multiply with
faculties), 257-8, S.D. II 591 (6 of all bodies), >>
Jerry: As far as I know, we are limited to this 7-plane
solar system. Also, this whole line of reasoning
depends on what the heck "we" is. If "we" is the
physical body, then we are limited to the physical
plane. If "we" is emotions/thoughts then we are
limited to the astral and mental planes. Etc.
>>Going from the physical, through the astral,
[ WHY LEAVE OUT THE "PSYCHIC ?" DTB] mental, causal,...>>
Jerry: What is the "psychic" if not the mental plane?
To me mental=psychic although astral+mental=psychic
is how many Theosophists use it. In either case,
why do you think I left it out?
>> DTB FEAR OF THE UNKNOWN is not a bad way to start
off. However for anyone to travel forward, the parameters of the
the rules of deportment and of investigation need to be carefully
At least I have found those present in Theosophy. The ideals of
appeal to me more than any amount of pleasure or rapture that
personally and selfishly "enjoyed." They give a basis from which
forward living can be oriented -- perhaps one could call it an
Jerry": You seem to have no idea what awaits, but I don't
think that arguing is getting us anywhere here. When
we go to sleep, if we have dreams with thoughts and
emotions we are on the astral plane; if we have dreams
without emotions we are on the mental plane, and when
we are in dreamless sleep we are on the casual plane.
DTB I don't doubt the change of "plane" What I draw attention
to is the fact that there is a continuity in the position of
"observer or "KNOWER," or WITNESS of the events. THAT does not
change. What is it? Is it the eternal "Pupil?"
So we find ourselves on these inner cosmic planes every
day. Whats to fear? Whats to avoid? All I am suggesting
is that such experiences should be done consciously
instead of unconsciously - and that is exactly what
evolution will give to us someday anyway, ready or
not. If you find this kind of thing dangerous, then
just sit back and wait for your own evolutionary
development to kick in. But I am nowhere suggesting
that we do anything that we aren't already doing
right now. When we die, we go through devachan.
Wouldn't it be nice if we went through devachan
consciously, and consciously picked out our next
parents? I don't see why you think that such a thing
DTB I make a distinction between the devachanic process between
adjacent lives -- a process conducted for everyone by Nature, and
the attempt, whether natural or contrived of "astral traveling,"
or "astral experiencing." Where THEOSOPHY sees danger and warns
against is the willful introduction of the desire to have such
experience WITHOUT having any pure or useful MOTIVE. We need it
says, to closely examine the WHY of what we wish to experience.
I see sanity and caution in that and not rash and passionate
Magic is all about doing things
consciously. It is not really about turning people
into toads (Chuck says that just to scare good
DTB Chuck to my way of thinking, does not introduce much of the
manasic element -- he deals with "scares." And possible "fears"
but says little about their cause, handling or direction.
THEOSOPHY on the other hand offers much on the "secret and inner"
planes. No "Theosophist" who knows something of what is taught
in ISIS UNVEILED, the SECRET DOCTRINE, the VOICE OF THE SILENCE,
and H.P.B.'s ARTICLES will be afraid. Perhaps others,
unacquainted with H.P.B.'s THEOSOPHY, think they are "afraid,"
and taunt them; but the matter of knowledge and wisdom are
separate views and paths. If one UNDERSTANDS something why
should he be afraid? Knowledge, if applied with clear attention
and with an understanding of what INVISIBLE NATURE is like, gives
strength, not fear. Fear arises from ignorance.
>> DTB I DON'T DOUBT THIS MAY BE ONE WAY OF DESCRIBING
SUCH A PROCESS, BUT WHEN THAT IS DONE, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE AND
Jerry: The purpose is enlightenment or Gnosis or seeing
spirtuality directly, and so on.
DTB I doubt if it is "spiritual." Psychic perhaps if the
motive is limited to experiment.
<<So far as I know, prana and the chi "meridians" are only
located in the etheric body, the lowest and most gross
of our subtle bodies. [ THEOSOPHICALLY: HPB might say: "ASTRAL
Jerry: Yes. I don't think she was partial to the term
DTB This was a term CL adopted -- and it confuses many.
>> DTB Theosophy states that an "ocean" of JIVA
surrounds everything -- both universal and individual Karma seem
these -- the "currents of LIFE in SPACE."
We draw (not by physical breath alone) a portion of that JIVA
karmically selective) into us -- by various
"gateways" -- and when it enters our sphere it is called "PRANA"
Jerry: I have no direct experience of "ocean of jiva"
so I will have to take that on faith for now. I do know
that one can develop "powers" by mixing one's
individual prana with the external prana of the
world. Prana is heavy-duty stuff!
>> DTB MAHAMUDRA means literally "the Great Image." --
one might take it for an illusion or a projection from some
prototype onto the screen provided for it (in matter) at some
Jerry: No, it means Great Seal or even Great Symbol. The
primary result of successful mahamudra meditation is
freedom from images. HH the Dali Lama would take
exception to your definition of mahamudra, as do I.
DTB The word/sound MUDRA has a number of meanings attached to
it a SANSKRIT DICTIONARY reveals. (impression from signet,
seal, stamp, sigil, print from type, countenance, one of the 5
posture in Hatha Yoga, positioning the fingers (gestures) to
transmit meaning in a dance-drama, and a few others says my
dictionary. So it would seem there are a number of ways in which
it can be used either esoterically or exoterically. [ We might
call it a kind of holy Braille, or a means of communicating
without sound by gestures and symbols. ]
Better not assume that two correspondents use the same word for
the same thing. This is where "Orientalists get into
difficulties. How does one read "between the lines?" Look for
instance at how H.P.B. covers this in S.D. II 566 to 569.
r>>However the act of meditating may be defined, it is
essentially (to me),
an attempt to secure the more profound Wisdom involved in some
event or fact
of life and nature.<<
Jerry: The act of meditation, if done properly,
should allow us to eliminate enough ignorance
to be able to see things as they really are. Anything
else is either superfluous or insufficient.
<<Blavatsky clearly says [ WHERE ?] that each atma-buddhi monad
"absorbed" (her word) at the end of the manvantara.<<
Jerry: Please see footnote in SD Vol I page 16 where
"pilgrim" is clearly defined. The so-called "eternal"
pilgrim is such only during "its cycle of incarnations"
after which it is "absorbed at the end of the cycle."
DTB thank you I was not sure which definition was used. So the
word MONAD was used pretty early in the S.D. -- Even there H.P.B.
does not indicate clearly what "the end of the cycle" is -- so we
speculate ? Also the word "absorbed" does not mean disintegrated
or destroyed. In her article ISIS UNVEILED AND THE
VISISHTADWAITA [Theosophist January 1886 -- BCW, Vol. 7, p. 50]
H.P.B. indicates in positive terms: "....that though merged
entirely into Parabrahm, man's spirit while not individual per
se, yet preserves its distinct individuality in Paranirvana owing
to the accumulation in it of the aggregates, or skandhas that
have survived after each death, from the highest faculties of the
>> DTB Absorbed but not dissolved, non non-essed -- to
me this is a very important difference,..<<
Jerry: I think you are grasping at a straw. Where does
this pilgrim hide during pralaya? Same place the "I"
hides between incarnations? Where do "I" go during
DTB I think I suggested reading the answer H.P.B. gave to this
question in TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE [ULT edn. pp 66
to 77; BCW Vol. 10, pp. 252 -p 263 ]
<<Why would the MONAD (Atma-Buddhi) be only "relatively eternal"
for only a Manvantara? What happens to all the work and energy
put into its
OK, I see you are siding with those folks who just
HAVE to see some kind of accomplishment from all of
this reincarnating. If you can't see the illogic
this viewpoint gets to, then I give up. But it is
not logical to me, so lets just agree it disagree.
DTB I really DON'T TRY TO SIDE WITH ANYONE. But using my own
power to think and using the material that one can study, I think
and write on the basis of what I am able to determine seems
coherent and logical. The Buddha certainly seems to me to
indicate that the "Way" leads to a "Goal." If true, then what
definitions does HE give of that ? And why?
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application