Theos-Talk Archives (April 2001 Message tt00052)

Friday, April 06, 2001

Dear Jerry:

Thanks.

Some further notes? Please see below.


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

But, first ,et me offer a few general comments:

In the S.D. H.P.B. indicates ( I 181) there are 2 lines of
evolution: Physical, Psychic-intellectual and spiritual. They
are intertwined.
Earlier the S.D. declares that there are 3 fundamental
propositions which when understood and applied enable the student
to grasp the whole of the Esoteric Occult system. ( S.D. I 14 -
19) These are metaphysical and apply to actualities, realities
that are almost incomprehensible to the embodied mind, the Lower
Manas wrapped in Kama (selfishness and desires).
Later on the S.D. declares that the Universe and Man are 7-fold
beings and details the reasons for this as part of the
progressive educational system in effect invisibly everywhere.
It extends from un-consciousness of the Self, through
Self-consciousness (Man's mind) to UNIVERSAL CONSCIOUSNESS OF THE
ONE SELF, and all its details. This last is both a MENTAL
DEVELOPMENT but is also an ETHICO-MORAL one which demands of the
individualized consciousness that it be harmless, generous and
merciful to all beings. (S.D. I 157, II 596)
Almost immediately the S.D. introduces us to the concept of the
"life-unit" which is called MONAD. Since no part of the Universe
is devoid of any aspect or potential of the WHOLE, those Monads
are deemed to be immortal, and contain the polar opposites of
SPIRIT and PRIMORDIAL MATTER To this may be added the
ever-present ABSOLUTE (as an eternal background) and MIND as a
"ray" of the UNIVERSAL MONAD-CONSCIOUSNESS-INTELLIGENCE. Further
it is implied that these Monads pass from stage to stage through
the whole spectrum provided by the vast evolutionary process.
Each is at first associated with a particular World (Planet) --
and we are in such a stage here on Earth. It is a process of
awakening the individual Monad into full knowledge and control of
the 7 "principles" detailed in S.D. Vol. I 157 and Vol. II p.
596. These are latent and potential from the start in every
being.
Another important criterion is that each Monad is in touch with
every other Monad at the highest spiritual level. It is the
Monads that become the "carriers of Karma."

She states that the process of evolution is eternal, so there are
always "beginners,": and "graduates," as well as pupils in
intermediary stages. The "beginners" are those that have just
individualized out of the Universal "MONADIC ESSENCE." The
"graduates" are those who have achieved the highest level of
SPIRITUAL SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS. They become the "supervisory
agents" of Nature and survey and guide her long established
processes in local areas of development. This is a voluntary and
self-assumed responsibility. It does not limit such Monads from
further progress in spiritual development.

During the process of cooperative advance, those who are
"graduates" stop to assist those who have less experience. They
share their wisdom but do not do any of the work of
self-discovery for those who are learning.

Nothing happens in the Universe or our world, or to any of the
various levels and kinds of pupils which is not already provided
for in potential. In the Akasa (the highest level of the "Astral
Light," a permanent record of all events is maintained.

It seems to me these are a few of the fundamental ideas that
pervade the operations of the Universe as seen and recorded by
the Great Lodge. (S.D. I 272-3)

Dallas
=====================================



-----Original Message-----

From: G S
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 10:35 AM
To:
Subject: Response to Dallas

To: dalval14@earthlink.net

Subject: RE: Manasic aspects? GAMES ?


<<DTB Each one develops his own personal approach,
However, Is there a universal one which covers all?
Other than KARMA, (general and individual) what "rules"
in common can we identify ?>>


The following should give you some ideas:


1. We all agreed to join the human life wave, so we all
express ourselves with human minds and bodies with
all of their limitations, etc.


DTB When and how did we agree? What causes the variations
and limitations?
-----------------------------------------------


2. In conjunction with 1 above, we all lost awareness of Reality,
and took on various degrees of ignorance.


DTB Why and How can we loose awareness of REALITY? Why
would we take on "degrees of ignorance ?"

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

3. We are all having neat adventures and developing
relationships over vast periods of time while we
slowly regain the awareness that we lost in 2 above.


DTB Does this happen by chance or under some Law ?

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

4. We are each in constant telepathic communication
with all other players in this life wave, but are not
usually conscious of it. Most remember it sometime
in our devachan, prior to rebirth.


DTB How can the degrees of unconsciousness be explained?
How can we assume a telepathic network of which many members are
unconscious?

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

5. Generally speaking, the theories that Blavatsky
lays out in her writings contain the other global rules
that we all play by.


DTB Are we given a "table of contents" on these, so that we
may examine their power and or relationships? At the moment it
assumes I know of the same ones you do, and that might be
incorrect.

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

6. Local rules change as we grow. Children play by
slightly different rules than adults, etc. These
include cultural and societal rules as well as
occult.

DTB Can greater detail be given? Are they as a group
specific?

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

7. Our world, the entire 7-plane Earth planetary chain, is
dualistic.


DTB If so that makes 14 (at least) pairs. But how does that
help to resolve things?
What causes them? What are the results presumed to provide ?

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


<< DTB Seems to me that "Karma" and "Chance" are being
synonimized ? Karma we can trace to the cause, and Chance we
can't ? So, I presume reincarnation, continuous egoic progress
from life to life, are doubtful in your concept ? Are we then to
try and reconcile the whole of theosophy with a single life's
memory? How are we t account for the individual and his peculiar
mix of character, capacity, defects and talents ?>>


Yes. Karma is causal and chance/chaos is statistical.
Rule 1 above means that we are all held subject to collective
karma in a statistical sense. Statistics are the mathematic
rules of groups and apply to our collective karma. So
individual or personal karma is causal while collective
karma is statistical. When you say "chance" you are talking
statistics, the language of probability or chance.


DTB However H.P.B. holds that the individual and the
personal KARMA is not an "average" but is a REALITY. The sum of
these realities makes for the KARMA of a FAMILY, a COMMUNITY, a
NATION, a WORLD, etc...

Even individual KARMA is itself divisible into many kinds and
levels (I.E.: physical, astral, vitality, desires, thoughts,
aspirations, TRUTH and FACTS.) Apparently it acts to educate and
to show how the law is essentially one of harmony and balance --
so as to restore any and all kinds of disturbed equilibrium.

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


Reincarnation or "egoic progress" are not doubtful at all.
But in an ultimate sense, there simply is no ego to progress
and the whole evolution/reincarnation business is a maya
or an illusion or dream all caused karmically by our inherent
ignorance of Truth. The realization of Truth or Gnosis
karmically causes our liberation or waking from this mayavic
dream.


DTB If the condition and the situation is a variable --
described as illusion or maya -- then there is something that is
stable and immutable.

You indicate there is a learning process here, if so then how is
the "pupil" to be described?
If one speaks of realization of TRUTH or GNOSIS, then there is a
means of describing THAT ?
If we are "caught in illusion" how do we free ourselves of it?
And if "freed" where does liberation or "waking" take us ?


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

<< DTB And that leaves me is a sea of uncertainty
indeed. Yet I, as a unit of consciousness, memory, thought,
etc... know full well I exist. I was wondering once that I got
here, there would be some explanation for that, and also some
hint as to what to do next.>>

Do you, indeed? There are thousands of years of Buddhists
who would argue with you about that. Its like saying
that I know full well my car exists because I can see it and
touch it and even smell it, and I paid for it and can drive
it, and so on. Yet where is the "car?" Isn't it just a
collection of parts put together a certain way that we call,
for convenience, a car? When I remove the tires, is it still
a car? After I remove the hood? The doors? The engine? sooner
or later as I keep removing parts while looking for "car" I
will see only a heap of parts. When these parts are lying in
disarray all over the place, is it still a car? No. Where
does the "car" go when I dissemble the parts? It obviously
was never there in the first place. Just a collection of
parts put together in a certain way that I imputed to be a
car and then believed and acted as if such a thing existed
with some kind of reality. Now, using this same logic, we
can see that each of those parts is also a collection of
even smaller parts, and so on down to quarks which are
likely also collections of parts. A "person" such as you
and I, is a collection of parts in the same way and we
impute the existence of "self" depending on this collection
(the skandhas comprise the body and mind, and are just
parts put together in certain ways and then mentally imputed
to exist and have no more real existence than that car I
talked about). This logical conclusion of no-thing-ness
is what Buddhists call emptiness, and it is as logical as
it is spiritual.


DTB Is this collection of things that in their harmony
provide a specific service (transportation) produced by us or for
us ? If so, then for what purpose? Do the assembled part have a
degree of independent consciousness? Are they benefited by the
temporary contact with each other, and with us? Do we serve them
in any way? Is there reciprocity? Is there a purpose ?

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


<<If the rules and speculations of modern psychologists,
philosophers, savants, etc... have large gaps in their
explanations, then where shall I acquire ay certitudes? It is
difficult to build on clouds of imagination, or hopes that are
dashed every moment by "fate or fortune." So why are we in this
situation? Wat it to be learned from it, if anything ?>>

The only one who has "certitude" is a Buddha, because
only a Buddha, almost by definition, is omniscient.
We need to "learn" that we are all basically ignorant
of what is really going on around us and within us and
that Knowledge is not in gaining facts so much as in
seeing what is real. This kind of Knowledge frees us
from the causal bonds of karma because karma acts via
our ignorance - ie unconsciously.


DTB I prefer your first premise above -- that we as WISE
BEINGS became entrapped in varying degrees of ignorance. If this
is true, then Why? How ?

I don't dispute that a portion of us is ignorant, or
inexperienced. But that same portion seems to have the capacity
to improve and to learn. and thus banish its ignorance,
substituting that for a knowledge of analogy, Law and perfection
(of some kind or another). I assume that those generalities are,
on analysis, specifics and that they are commonly available in
equal shares to all.

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


<<I observe order and sequence around me, am I to negate that?>>

Do you honestly expect me to believe that you cannot
see any disorder in your life???? No one can see the one
without also seeing the other, my friend. You cannot
see ugliness unless you know what beauty is, and so on.


DTB I am not blind to contrast, but that does not prevent me
from inquiring into the SOURCE of such a condition. To know
TRUTH is to detect lie and ignorance. Agreed. But there is then
something which transcends both these conditions. Is this part
the REALITY in me? If so what about those parts which are still
to be educated and brought up to a "warm running speed?"
It just occurred to me that to be a "pessimist" one has first to
be an "optimist," or else one never knows the difference. Is the
Perceiver within an "Optimist?" If so, then is "pessimism" a
condition of false perception that enwraps the ignorant?


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


<< DTB Agreed there are many things we cannot "measure."
Also that measurement often destroys some aspect of the thing
being measured. But measurement (or its attempt) implies a
search for order, cycles, repetitiveness, etc... Laws ?>>

Yes, it does imply such a search, and we are all on this
search or quest for Truth. That's what Theosophy is al
about and why we are on this list. I don't really have a
problem with calling things "laws." I am, after all, a
mechanical engineer, and understand principles and
their mathematical expression, as you do too. But most
of nature's "laws" are inherently made to be broken so
to speak. They allow for their own transcendence. Why?
Because they're only the rules of this mayavic illusion,
and its like a lucid dreamer can control their dreams,
so an awakened person can control their life - but this
is all done under the laws/rules. The problem that I
see with how you talk about karma, is that you seem to
ignore or avoid its inherent elimination. Maybe I am
wrong, but the entire possibility of liberation from
karma (the thrust of Buddha's four Nobel Truths) is
de-emphasized in Theosophy, and in your posts.


DTB I believe the Laws run all the time -- I mean the ones
that demand of materials an optimum performance. Yes, we take
wear and tear and friction and the pounding abuse of reciprocal
motion vs. vortical motion into account. And we know that good
maintenance demands the replacement of "worn parts." But in
doing these routine things, do we not follow the laws of good
management and the conservation of materials ?

When I speak of KARMA I really try to take it into account all
its many aspects.
We have an unfortunate tendency to look at materials as
"inanimate, entity-less things," and assign to them little or no
intelligence or consciousness. But those things are composed of
structures derived from mineral, animal or vegetable sources.
Shall we now continue to discard them when they no longer help
us? Do we assume that they are not also progressing "life units"
and they become the repositories of our indifference or scorn ?
The concept of an "astral model form," or the "average usage life
(Pranic vitality)" of a component may be balanced by an actual
perception of the way in which the individual atom, molecule or
crystal is impressed by the emotional and mental bias of the
person using or installing it.
Consider an "atom." Outside of its inherent properties which we
ascribe to its composition, weight and the number of sub-atomic
"parts," -- of electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, etc.,
etc., we give it no thought -- The average user says: "Its just
a thing. I will use it for as long as it is able to assist in my
mechanism or process, then I throw it away, and replace it." And
he gives practically no further thought to the subject.
Theosophically that is callousness and insensitivity to the life
force that is coursing through that "object." If we think of it
at all we assign it a minor importance.


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


<< DTB rule or Law are the same to me too. An
orderliness which attunes the separate beings to each other --
but can these be observed and defined ?>>


Judge says, "I do not admit that "we were once divine
and have fallen"; but say that are divine and always were,
and that the falling is but apparent and due to the
personal consciousness..." (Echoes, VOL II p 344)


DTB I would fully endorse that. And try to apply it.


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

<< DTB OK I do tend to look at the effect, and wonder
exactly what the "moral" part of the equation is. But can anyone
help in this ? If "vice" and "virtue" are polar opposites, the
what is it in me that sees the difference? What can choose?
What is the Intuition (or is it the Voice of Conscience) that
warns me ? How can I hold a debate internally on the best way to
choose ? All this needs explanation. Do you say Theosophy does
not provide that ?>>

The problem here, between vice and virtue or good and evil,
has to do with the nature of duality. You, like lots of
other folks, try to hold to the one while throwing out
the other. You want to accumulate virtue while eliminating
vice, don't you? You want to stamp out evil. Well, it can't
be done.


DTB Rather I would try to restore order where there is the
obstruction of disorder. A mere "throwing out" of an object or
an individual does nothing to change the conditions that created
discord. It seems to me far better to try and heal the
situation, if possible, and within our capacity.

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

The Christians use the metaphor of the devil to
explain why evil remains in the world, without a logical
reason for why God puts up with it. But good and evil are
two sides of a duality and you can't have one side without
the other, just like Blavatsky talks about spirit and matter.
You say that you can see the difference, and that's fine.
That's a good start. Everyone first must recognize the
difference. Then everyone tries to hang on to the one they
like while throwing away the other - until sooner or later
they realize that it can't be done. Then, after many lifetimes
of work and study, it becomes apparent that dualities
themselves must be transcended. This realization is the
mark of the Bodhisattva.

DTB An all powerful GOD and an all powerful DEVIL seem to be a
paradox unless we see in the imaginary DEVIL an equally imaginary
GOD. If the description is intended to depict the polarity of
Nature on an impersonal basis that analogy is good. But it is
vitiated (in my esteem) the moment we personalize both or either
of those postulants.

Agreed -- but as there is no "dust heap" in Nature where we can
"throw refuse" it seems that healing and straightening out messes
is preferable. At the end of LIGHT ON THE PATH is a remarkable
essay on KARMA. I rather admire the illustration given there of
the strands of Karma and their harmonizing -- by us.


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

<< DTB sorry, but I don't see any evidence of a Personal
God anywhere? Of what use would such a construct be ? Do I
manufacture it or is it something pre-existent, are those who
support this idea prepared to prove it ? If I take the 3
attributes of Deity, then a personal god is totally illogical.
Who and how does the limited concept of WISDOM / LAW / PROGRESS
arise ? (I assume these remain the 3-fold attributes of
Deity. )>>

Well, I agree with you, and only mentioned God for the humor
of it. Perhaps I should have said, "the creator/creators/
designers of the human body" instead of God?


DTB Got it. I didn't think you were that serious. But tom
substitute "creator" implies a high intelligence -- H.P.B.
implies that Perfected MEN assume the position of "guides" and
"overseers" as nature causes the Universe and al its creatures to
emanate again. The Bodhisattva becomes a Buddha and then a
DHYANI ( Gnyani) and so on there are no end of "names"
indicating ever increasing responsibilities under a LAW which
prevents any power being used for self-benefit.


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

<< DTB But that does not tell me anything more than what
we started with, does it? What is life for? Where does it lead
us ? If the
division Body, soul, spirit is true, then how do I derive an
understanding
of their interplay ? ( se S.D. I 181-2)>>

Your questions are those that manas demands answers for.
Manas will strive and struggle and work tirelessly looking
for answers. Well, I found answers that I am happy with,
but it took many years and lots of effort. And even now
I cannot put the answers into words that anyone would
understand. Let me just say that all of your questions
are time-oriented and they demand time-dependent answers
which don't exist, because the answers are outside of
time altogether. When consciousness goes outside of time,
such concepts as evolution, progress, doing, goals, and
the like, no longer apply.


DTB I will admit the time-orientation of my questions, but
not that I am seeking a limit to them or the answers as I cannot
see any "limit" in infinity, motion, duration or space. We are
at the moment hampered by our own limits, and tend t view
metaphysical and ethical answers in those terms. I agree that
there are other planes where our present views have little or no
meaning. But having said that I am really not much wiser -- I do
not know what their parameters of being are. I do however think
that they are analogous to our preset experience.

Consider the concept of the 49 fires -- a plane grid 7 x 7 = 49

Arbitrarily, using the x and y axis, place the 7 principles of
the Universe/Man using the sequence given in S.D. I 157 or II
596.
Now look at the points of intersection, and the mixture that
would seem to be the result of those two strong forces meeting
there -- of course the others are also present but in attenuated
strength (I would presume). If we were to label the Principles
on the x axis ROUNDS. And on the Y axis RACES we could view the
probable influences impinging on mankind when he passes through
the course of evolution as described in S.D. I 200 diagram. [Our
present position is said to be 4th ROUND, 4th GLOBE [D], and 5th
RACE. It would seem to me to indicate that Manas is emerging
from a passage through Kamic regions -- or the birth of the
independent BUDDHI-MANAS. [ Now I may be quite wrong in this,
and too broad, but it is only an idea.]

If we assume that our CONSCIOUSNESS is unitary and undying, we
may perceive that it passes unmodified through a great assembly
of experiences. It is the "Monads of lesser experience" that
attach themselves to it, and it is they which are profiting from
these variations as they pass from "ignorance" to
"enlightenment."


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

<< DTB Without the "hub" the purpose of a wheel is lost,
The "Rim," or the "Spokes" might believe the "Hub" was
non-essential, yet it holds the whole structure together ? And
it moves little or not at all. Another: the value of a house is
not its walls, but the SPACE it encloses, and that is "no-thing"
until used, or filled with concrete objects.>>

But the holding together of the wheel is not a "doing" is
it? Its rather more of a being than a doing. Divinity IS,
it doesn't DO anything, because it is outside of time where
actions are impossible and who cares because everything
is already done anyway. You surely have enough scientific
understanding to know how time works (and this includes
the paradox that the equations of physics hold for unidirectional
time) and you should be able to intuitively feel what being
outside of time is probably like. All action or Motion
is time-dependent. Without a space-time continuum, there
is no action, no karma, no Motion, etc. Think about this
when I tell you that the Monad is totally outside of any
space-time continuum.


DTB Understood. But I say that in order to sever the limits
of matter limited (LINEAR, PLANAR, OR EVEN SPHERICAL) Time, we
are forced to use the ETERNAL CONSCIOUSNESS that I ever within us
already. It is not an acquisition, even if it may seem to the
"embodied mind" to be a "new concept."


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


<< DTB Agreed again, but then whether We wear filters of
some kind is not essential to the search for stability, is it ?>>

The answer here is not to search for some kind of external
truth while wearing such glasses, but rather to remove the
glasses and then see what's really there. Theosophy, like
any metaphysical system, is a pair of tinted glasses. Words
are themselves the tints.


DTB My observation of the Theosophical methods is that they
tend to identify filters and then remove them, so that no
possibility of ignorance may distract or shelter us from accurate
perception of REALITY and TRUTH.
We are always confronted with the 3 certainties:
1. The Universe exists,
2. I (You) exist, and
3. There are innumerable relations possible between # !. and
# 2.

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


<<Can we assume these superior beings were once men like we are
now, and that at some point they resolved that they would develop
their spiritual capabilities and test the validity of the local
and then, the universal set-up?>>

No, they do not "develop" anything. Rather than infold or
unfold, inner capabilities that were already there.



<<If there were not already a stable center ( Spiritual ?) in us
would we be able to conceive of it. We think our earth is pretty
stable, yet at the equator it whirls at about 1,000 miles an
hour, and the whole earth circles the sun at a far vaster speed.
Then the Solar System as a whole circles the Milky Way, and so
on.>>

Exactly, because our universe is in a space-time continuum
where Motion rules. But rigpa or the Monad is outside of
this continuum where Motion no longer applies. Thus only
the Monad is a "stable center" but again, the word 'center'
is misleading because it implies a spatial location whereas
the Monad is infinite.


DTB Agreed -- My view also.


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


<<Or if you prefer to go the other way -- if the molecule can be
defined the atom becomes a part of quantum mechanics -- and
sub-atomic particles are only concepts of real energy -- and
there are probably a whole series of still smaller centres of
energy -- no "end" either way. Yet this does not make our
existence invalid ! It does not destroy purposiveness as a prime
element in the concept of world and individual "progress.">>

It does, I think, destroy the notion of ultimate reality.
Our universe has a conventional or relative reality, but
not an ultimate (meaning independent) reality. Everyone
assumes that the physical universe exists, and some think
that the whole 7-plane solar system exists, but it only
does so in a relative or conventional sense, which is to
say in the sense of imputing a car to exist where there
is really only a temporary collection of parts. This is
easy to see with a car - much harder to see with our "self."


DTB Agreed


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


<< DTB No matter how described, (I mean: how clothed or
veiled) we seem to return to the CENTER OF CONSCIOUSNESS and its
experiences. From those can we not draw conclusions? I cannot
agree that we are pointless and so is Life and Nature.>>

When I say that life is a game, you immediately jump to
the (false) conclusion that I am saying life is pointless.
Why can't a game have a point? If an artist doesn't paint
any pictures, won't his creativity be stifled to the point
of disease or death? Most psychologists would say that
a painter has to paint in order for self-expression, which
is a healthy thing. The same is true for the Monad, which
also has to self-express, and thus produce its "rays."
Life is chocked full of the potential for self-expression
right up to the point of awakening to the fact that no
self exists. At that point one wants to share that
realization with others, which is also a form of self-
expression, and so it goes...


DTB My contention is that there is a vast scheme of reality
which might be called (for lack of something better) "GOODNESS."
I think the expression: "obedience to Universal LAW" is probably
a better one than "goodness." But I do not imply blind
submission, but only illumined agreement to "respect, use, and
work with."
If we apply the concepts of absolute accuracy in time, space and
motion, the universality of our power potentials -- because we
all share in them equally -- and seemingly an attempt to express
in this life those ideals that we sense pervade the universe --
expressed, perhaps, as "brotherhood," we would not carp at any
truly harmonious LAW system.

Most modern psychologists express excellence today in terms of
satisfaction, pleasure, leisure, and all those are based in
liking and disliking in pleasure and pain and in general these
are KAMIC ideals. There is little or no REASON or LOGIC advanced
to explain them -- other than WE (and you) like them.
The mere "observation" does not explain their cause nor any
variation we might impose on our reactions and actions.

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



<<even if the old Indian philosophers called life
a "LEELA" -- a dance, a drama. It had its rhythms and purposes,
even if was considered an "illusion." >>

What do you think would be a fitting purpose for such
an illusion?


DTB The temporary pleasure that a well executed motion,
rhythm and melody implies. It is a higher KAMIC expression of
enjoyment -- and has little to do with actuality . Our actuality
is going to be for a long while the setting right of some of the
horrible things we did in the past. Thinking of the Universe,
there is the concept of the KAMADEVA ( T Glossary 170-1) which
is an IDEAL base for the "4th Universal principle." It is desire
regulated by "moral fitness." ( WISDOM as a basis for any and
all actions. )

To my mind the self-regulation of the DESIRE Principle is obvious
when we contemplate how KARMA returns to us all the effects and
results of our actions, words, feelings -- and who wants to
suffer from their own ill choices ? Self-defence demands self-
regulation. [ But this concept depends on Justice, Mercy and
Exactitude in regard to KARMA, and its concomitant REINCARNATION
( of all beings without any exceptions ).


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


<<But then the concept of
the Akasa, the highest aspect of the astral Light, gives us a
recording permanency of even illusory will o the wisps.
Everything gets recorded. Sounds like a basis for Karma to me.>>

Your faith in the permanency of the astral light is naive,
Dallas.


DTB I did not say "astral Light. I said and meant the
permanent record -- the AKAS. The Akas is MAHA-BUDDHI, the polar
opposite of SPIRIT in every MONAD. It is primordial Matter. In
Hindu philosophy what is recorded there in ineffaceable, It is
the basis for KARMA. We can never escape it. We are
continuously responsible for all we choose. ( see end of LIGHT
ON THE PATH -- the essay on KARMA. )

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

History is as illusive as the future. Only the present moment
exists, and then only relatively
or conventionally. The astral light or Akasa imprints
basic tendencies and general patterns, not specific
events.

DTB I do not think any theosophical reference supports that.
Do you know one? As I understand it the method of conveying
personal Karma is quite specific -- for the reason that we
imprint the "little-lives (Monads) " with our magnetic and MORAL
quality when we make any choice. They then become the "carriers"
of our Karma. They also serve to record in the Akasa the
impression we place on them. When in due time they return to us,
(this life or some future one) they bring the impression we gave
them -- which either helps or obstructs us, and that is
individualized Karma.
General karma as for a family, a tribe, a sect, a community or a
nation is that convergence of similar results that reflect on the
recipients the common actuality of a Karma in which they all
shared. Both the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY -- Judge; and H.P.B.'s THE
KEY TO THEOSOPHY make the operations of Karma quite clear, I
think.

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

This message that I am sending you now, if you
go into the astral light, you may see that I sent you
a message but the not the specific wording. Only the
"aroma" of an event is imprinted, not specific colors
and details - these are imprinted on the astral plane
which is fraught with deception BECAUSE of its details.
------------------------------


DTB Not being experienced in any astral light perception or
control, I avoid having anything to do with it on a "will," or a
"curiosity" basis. By nature, I am extremely cautious.
I am extremely cautious in regard to any astral light perception,
or control (inner or external) and thus I avoid having anything
to do with it on any basis. You may characterize me as anything
you please, and perhaps you may be right in your estimate. But
that is a stance I have adopted till I know a lot more about the
"astral plane." In the meanwhile I make my notes and keep all
descriptions in mind.


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


<<I also agree that cyclic law is a contrast to chaos. But I
also
respect the concept that the general tendency of the Universe is
towards order and progress rather than a useless dispersal of
cluttered or disparate energies.>>

How can you make such a statement in light of the second
law of thermodynamics????? This universe is increasing
in entropy and is slowly turning into a particle soup,
according to modern science.

DTB	This is unverified theory. If entropy is occurring, and
energy from our "universe" is being siphoned off into another
repository, then I presume that NATURE (the Universe) has
provided for that. I would presume that the theory of
evolutionary "start" accounts for the high levels of energy,
which, since then have been settling down into a stage where
living creativity and self-induced alterations within the general
laws are possible. How else would self-determination and
individual consciousness develop ? Do they not need a field
whereon to have experience and develop the wisdom from
observations that all profit from? Is it not our privilege as
Scientists to observe Nature's ever more secret workings? And
when they are observed, how is it that we do not equilibrate
them? Why should we consider Nature to be wasteful, ignorant and
spitefully stupid ? [ or, are those qualifications to be
reserved for some mythical and unproven GOD or DEVIL -- as taken
to be persons ? ]

[Driving down the freeway the other day we saw just ahead of us a
personalized license plate that read;
READ DOG.
Now if the person were dyslexic that would read : GOD DEAR or
DEAR GOD . Humor ? ]

I try not to confuse the "theories" of modern science based on
their observations over a small fraction of time (2 to 400 years)
But the observed entropy is first fueled by a certain measurable
increment and perhaps what we look at is a normal return to
equilibrium. In any case it is a vibratory movement of which we
need to see both sides.

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

Modern chaos theory shows
how evolution can come out of the environmental entropic
energy, but only locally. Locally we are evolving,
while globally we are becoming more chaotic and less
orderly and by all accounts the global will one day
outweigh the local.


<< DTB Excuse me, but I cannot say that "clouds" in any
way help me define the "ground" or the "sky." They imply air,
temperature, moisture, the "dew-point," an equation for
flotation, and a dozen other factors -- which a scientist
recognizes -- but as a basis for being or thought, I don't get
the analogy.>>

The analogy is that just as clouds obscure the sky
so thoughts obscure rigpa. I am sorry if you don't
understand this. The point is that in order to experience
our intrinsic awareness we have to stop or look beyond
our thoughts. As above so below - the clouds are outer
while thoughts are inner and the two have many similarities.

DTB	I think you are trying to say that there is a Perceiver or a
Watcher that looks on the fuzzy clouds (thoughts) and tries to
distinguish confusion and obscuration from exactitude and
necessity. But is that not the REAL MAN within? I mean the one
who uses the MIND and is the THINKER? Is that not the Eternal
Pilgrim? The Spiritual Individual? And is not its presence
there an assistance to the "lower 'ray' of Mind" enmeshed in our
daily confusion -- the Lower Manas (or Kama-Manas) ?
Why cannot we assume that the SPIRITUAL INDIVIDUAL (the Higher
Self -- ATMA) has sacrificed its high position in order to become
a "tutor" to the Lower Mind -- the embodied self. The ATMA does
not need to do anything, but it can decide to be of assistance
when needed to those Monads that are struggling to become as it
is -- fully WISE. -- Is this too far-fetched? I think I already
drew your attention to H.P.B.'s TRANSACTIONS pp 64 - 76 where
this condition is hinted at.


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


<<They are conditioned and temporary limits to physical eyesight
(used as an analogy for mental perception). As a matter of fact,
regardless of ground, sky, clouds, it is still "I AM I" which
does the Perceiving.>>

But what are you? You experience a body and a mind, and
then impute a self dependent on those experiences - but
that doesn't make it so. Reality is NOT what it appears.


DTB	Those objections do not make entire sense to me. Can you
clarify?

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


<<Patanjali uses several concepts for this
central POWER: SEER, PERCEIVER, WITNESS, etc... Each implies a
unit of consciousness that is independent of others, yet, it also
recognizes their coexistence and similarity to itself. Perhaps
it is the "scribe" who makes the Akasic records ?>>

All of these things are dependent on something else,
and thus can have no permanency or ultimate existence.
Rigpa or the Monad is beyond any perceiver or witness.
Dallas, you are not going far enough. When you do, I
don't think you will be able to find an independent self
anywhere.

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

DTB	But in considering the MONAD to be conjoined SPIRIT (Atma)
and PRIMORDIAL MATTER (Buddhi) are we not saying that which you
do under "Rigpa" [a term I am unfamiliar with]

It is the INNER HIGHER SELF, THE PERCEIVER , the ETERNAL WITNESS.
It is a "force powerful for good" rather than any "person." It
is an intimate and powerful "agent" of the Universal NATURE which
exists as Patanjali puts it: for the sake of the "Soul's"
experience.
=================================

<<"CIT" (chit) is a name given in Hindu philosophy (as I am
given
to understand it) to ABSTRACT CONSCIOUSNESS -- it is often
paired with "achit" or unconsciousness (from our point of view,
embodied -- or drowned -- in matter, and the qualities and
sensations of a material environment). But both of these are
only the outer robes (because they come and go periodically) of
"PARABRAHMAM" or the "ABSOLUTE" which is conditionlessness, and
cannot be described in any of our terms.>>

I stand corrected then. The Monad is then beyond cit.
You say Parabrahman as if that meant something - it
really only means "beyond Brahman" which is what it
should mean.

DTB	AGREED It is a synonym for the ABSOLUTE.

You also throw the word absolute around
as if it meant something. It only has meaning in
relation to its opposite, relative. I would make the
equation absolute=nirvana and then relative=samsara
and in this way I can see a nice dovetailing between
Buddhism and Theosophy that just doesn't exist otherwise.

================================
DTB	You are probably right insofar as the common and average
usage of terms goes. In theosophy H.P.B. uses it to indicate the
SOURCE of all modifications or evolutions -- an ETERNAL and
INSCRUTABLE BACKGROUND. It is neither manifested nor
non-manifested. It IS.
As to the IDEAS I would judge that in the basic fundamentals
there is no difference. The only confusion would arise about the
veils and connotations that either exoteric Buddhism or exoteric
Theosophy might place there.
In the S.D. H.P.B. spends a good deal of space making sure that
the words an symbols of various ancient theogonies and
religious/philosophical systems are shown to be equivalents. I
think this is part of our training in learning how the Universal
Doctrine could be expressed or is expressed by various existing
systems.
=====================


Tzongkapa taught that absolute was the opposite of
nothingness and that absolutism and nihilism were
two extreme positions to avoid, and I have to agree
with him. To cling to absolute while trying to ignore
or eliminate relative or nothingness is like holding
onto good while throwing away evil, and I already
mentioned how this is an impossibility.

DTB In manifestation the contrasts serve to balance and explain
each other. But there is even in this chaotic situation a single
line which is impartial medial, and able therefore to
distinguish between extremes -- it holds t the "Middle Way" of
balance and relies on a consensus of observations and thoughts to
secure a closer understanding of reality. At least that is how I
understand it. Earlier, in my trying to describe the Monad I
said that between SPIRIT (Atma) and PRIMORDIAL MATTER (Buddhi)
there appeared t me to be the MIND principle and this was
impartial to the extremes because it had its birth and source in
the ABSOLUTE -- the "eternal and indescribably 'background.'"
>From our incarnated point of view "reality" is an unrealizable
ideal. "Absolute" is a way of saying there is an ever-present
SOMETHING -- an indescribable SOURCE.
I agree that Atma, Buddhi and Manas are all derived from that ONE
SOURCE (which ought to be NAMELESS) and that they have existence,
and stand for "realities" whose "existence" may be limited by the
Kalpa in which they serve as a basis for monadic progression.
But nothing that we may be able to define here and now has any
relationship to ACTUALITY or REALITY in metaphysical and
transcendent conditions -- we are then using (or rather trying to
use) our "intuition" to speak of these.
What we are really looking for, is the logic and the laws of
action that demand their presence as basis for our own program of
improvement.
We also seek to find if others have had this kind of thought or
experience, and whether the concept is valid, regardless of what
any system modern or ancient may have to say. Can we prove any
of this to our own satisfaction now? Can we convey this idea to
another ?

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


<< DTB If applied unilaterally, personally, physically I
agree it is very "scary." I was not so applying it. I was using
it from the impersonal and Universal view point. It comes back
to the basic: IS THERE LAW IN THE UNIVERSE, or is there none.>>

I don't think anyone will disagree with there being laws.
The disagreement is in their interpretation.


<<No 50/50 position is completely tenable, that I can see. But a
medial position between the Pole of SPIRIT and the pole of MATTER
is that position of the Mind, which sees and understands both of
these opposites.>>

Here you are wrong, I think. The mind, manas, sees both
sides of a duality without realizing what a duality is.
Its more than just opposites. They are two sides of the
same thing, a concept that goes beyond the ability of
manas to understand. Thus manas holds to one and throws
the other away, and is upset when the discarded unwanted side
keeps showing up.


DTB	I have wondered about this also. I would also agree that
the "embodied mind" limited to materialist understands finds
itself in great difficulties to try to convey anything relating
to either higher or different lane than its common, every-day,
observations and sensations.
But then the ideas keep coming up. So I conclude that beyond the
Lower manas, there has to be a higher, wiser one. How is that to
be contacted and used?
On the other hand if our CONSCIOUSNESS IS ONE and as such is able
to pass unmodified from plane to plane, then the memories of
experience on any one plane are accessible to it wherever it may
be for the moment. It then requires a effort of will to change
consideration to whatever level one desires to work on or
perceive by. Does this help?

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


<<Your definition of MAHAT seems to clash with the Sanskrit,
which
says that it is "the first principle of Universal Intelligence
and Consciousness" -- of root nature or Pradhana -- or
Mulaprakriti (root Matter) -- It is said to produce both Manas
(the thinking principle) and ahamkara ( egotism, or the feeling
of I AM I in the Lower Manas ( Kama-Manas or the embodied
brain-mind).>>

I am aware of the above, which is a Hindu interpretation.
Buddhists don't use the term Mahat at all, and would not
likely agree to the above definition as having any reality.

The Buddhist view is that it is this ahamkara that is
a defilement in need of eradication. Thus Mahat=Maya and
I agree with Grigor that Buddhists don't use the term maya
and that it too is Hindu.

DTB	As I said, the words do not trouble me, I would prefer to
have definitions, or else we reach an impasse. Familiar as I am,
with both Hindu and Buddhist philosophy, and with Theosophy, I
seek to grasp what they teach in common. In other words, to get
beyond and behind the words and phrases. Those tend to divide.
IDEALS unite us all.
One may start with any system, and to the extent that it
expresses truth and reality, to that extent it is useful. But
when I am confronted with the limits of interpretations, then I
despair of getting at the source meaning behind those phrases.
If I may so express it, it is the difference between the "Eye"
and the "Heart" doctrines;


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

<< DTB The profound views of Hinduism and Buddhism are
not essentially different though perhaps couched in different
words and analogies.>>

I suspect that the adherents to both groups would
beg to differ with your statement. Hinduism postulates
an atma, while Buddhists postulate an anatma, and
you say there is no difference???

DTB	Again this is contrast. ATMA is undefinable. So too is
ANATMA -- at least definable in our physico-material terms and
using the present Lower Manasic tools.

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

<<How can you distinguish the MONAD ( or do you mean the
universal
MONAS ?) from its "rays?" How can any one distinguish the ONE
SPIRIT from its many "rays?" { see S.D. I 570-575]>>

The rays are self-expressions in space-time, while the
Monad itself is outside of any such continuum. This
seems fairly straightforward to me. An analogy would
be our waking-self which goes to sleep and experiences
a dream-self. Why do we dream? Why does the Monad express
itself in rays? These two questions have the same answer.


DTB As far as I can understand the contact of UNIVERSAL ATMA
to any ATMIC "Ray" is almost instantaneous. Time and distance in
our plane of reference does not exist there.

In TRANSACTIONS (above mentioned) the Dream state is of several
levels. 1. -- corresponding to Kama which is emotional, and 2.
corresponding to Higher Manas (Buddhi-Manas) The division here
is between altruism and selfishness, universality and isolation
in personal attitude. These are very broad definitions as there
are many other divisions in the matter of dreams as TRANSACTIONS
details on p. 78.
The determinants are quite different. If we assume that SPIRIT
or ATMA whether in its entirely or in its metaphysical "Rays" can
only be represented by "perfection" and "altruism" everything
lower in moral level than that is defective to some extent.
===========================================


<<If you wish to have a fight with HPB's expressions you are
welcome.>>

The only problem I have is your continual quoting of
Blavatsky out of context. This is one of the reasons
why I dislike using quotes. Each branch of Christianity
quotes selective passages of the Bible to "prove" its
point. It really proves nothing at all, except that
the Bible is subject to lots of interpretations. So
with HPB's writings - and she did most of it on purpose.


DTB	And that is why, when discussing Theosophical ideas, and
also being cautious so as not to confuse others as to meanings,
When I do quote, I try to give the references, so that you, or
anyone, may go there and read for themselves what H.P.B. (or some
other person) says.
I think you are right in saying that selective quotes are very
often misleading. That is why I say we are each "filters" of
even our own meanings. However, if we are going to deal with
Theosophical values and meanings we are not going to escape from
HPB's presentations.
If there is real error in what I have to offer, then, a student
may have some reference that improves on it or confutes it. If
that is shared, then: That would be most valuable, since we are
looking for the TRUTH OF THINGS and not just to prove ourselves
"right." None of our views are anything but perhaps a shadow, a
small portion of REALITY and TRUTH. We are all learners as well
as sharers of what we have acquired.

Was not that the reason why Ammonius Saccas started the Eclectic
School in Alexandria so many centuries ago? Does not the T.S.
try to continue such work?
As always,
thanks
Dallas,

Jerry S.