Theos-Talk Archives (September 2001 Message tt00219)

Saturday, September 22, 2001


Dear friend:

Regarding LAW and laws.

While not opening a debate, let me state again what I have
learned from Theosophy on the subject of Karma.

Karma = the Law of action and reaction.

To act someone or something has to chose between 2 or more
options.

Hence the CHOOSER is within an ENVIRONMENT, and has several
variables: SPACE, TIME, SUITABILITY OF MOTION, OBJECTIVES,
etc....

We could include in this consideration. ACTOR, ACT and FIELD OF
ACTION (environment).

The Environment would consist of at least three basic divisions:
IDEAL, INERTIA, ACTIVITY.

KARMA is a most ancient concept. It is not the construct of an
inventive philosopher, nor is it the dogma of some "faith" that
can offer no viable proof of its operations.

KARMA is the living and ineradicable effect of motive. MOTIVE
(the reason why anything is done) is universal in nature -- every
being has intelligence and awareness (CONSCIOUSNESS) and is
assumed to be an eternal being. [ Of course if intelligence and
consciousness are assumed to be a product of the FORM (or
material) then these ideas fall). But this does not account for
the formation and limits of any FORM. ]

The scale of Evolution that Theosophy envisages and demonstrates
( as in The SECRET DOCTRINE ) is a comprehensive statement of the
reason WHY there is any existence at all. Why is there a
Universe? What are their any beings in it? If we assume there
is a purpose, then what is the end result supposed to be?

I have no idea what may be meant by an "esoteric position." I
assume that the "exoteric position" is something different? How
is one to draw a distinction that is comprehensible. How do they
inter-relate? Who can demonstrate them? What is their value?

Since most if not all of us (humans) use the intelligence called
the "mind" and the process of "thinking," and "remembering,"
which an average and an ordinary brain-mind has, to seek to
understand universal principles and / or particulars, any claim
to use something superior, internal, sacred or secret needs
definition if it is to be at all useful to a person like me --
the average "man in the street."

I do believe that the extension of the mind processes are elastic
and have no real limits. We can push our mind development as far
as we decide on, providing that in that process one does not lose
sight of certain basics which area common starting point for all.
The concepts of Wisdom acquired through trance, or when asleep,
or the Intuition, or the "Voice of Conscience" are all explained
in detail by Theosophy using the average, ordinary evidence
accessible to any sincere enquirer.

This ability to control and direct the mind is one that
demonstrates the internal WITNESS or PERCEIVER who is the REAL
MAN, and to whom the Mind is a tool to be shaped and used, and
the principle of Desires and passions (Kama) is usually an
impediment because it is so irrational and unruly. It is the
Mind which ultimately surveys the raging passions and decides
which to employ and which to suppress or control. We do it all
the time, but we are not always aware of this automatic process.

For me those basics are:

1.	the immortality of the Spiritual inner SELF -- it is a part of
the all-pervasive UNIVERSAL SPIRIT. It is deathless and
continually attentive, and registering of all decisions and
changes.

2.	All beings have this as a base, and over an immense period of
repeated experience, this inner SELF realizes its UNITY WITH ALL
OTHER BEINGS.

3.	It perceives that its "body" made up of various degrees of
sensitive "matter" is a kind of "school" in which intelligences
develop their individual sense of SELF. The "sense of SELF" is
reflective of their immortality and the potential omniscience
which is theirs by right.

4.	LAW and Laws pervade and unite the Universe and every being in
it. None escapes the sweep of this sensitive agent. No action
on any plane takes place without a corresponding effect being set
up for future reflection back to the originator. [ In this is
to be found the basis for "fate," and "destiny." ]

5.	The Ultimate Goal of Evolution is a TOTAL KNOWLEDGE of all
that can be known. Each individual has this capacity and it is
not limited by physical size.

To be told subtly or directly that there are themes that are "too
high" to be explained says nothing.
In fact Nature does not operate that way at all.

Everything that is superficial, material or exoteric has an inner
and an underlying meaning, a CAUSE. Can we not call those the
LAW and the LAWS of the UNIVERSE and also agree that they make no
favorites, they are uniform and fair for all?

Priests and those who overtly or covertly claim some special
insight, evade making explanations. Those who are convinced of
nature's innate justice, explain. They also can demonstrate the
doctrines they enunciate.

As we read and study it, we find that Theosophy is in the
"explanation business" and does not conceal anything.

It seems to be a record of the findings of many generations of
wise men. As one may read the MAHATMA LETTERS or The SECRET
DOCTRINE there is no attempt at concealment, but, rather an
enthusiastic effort to encourage systematic investigation by each
student of the wonderful correlations of nature. Of course one
might be misunderstanding what is written, in which case forgive
me.

As I see it, science, and philosophical logic approach the
barriers of comprehension (which are artificial) all the time.
Their findings, if presented without theories or hypothesis are
useful. Their theories of origins development and purpose are
found to be fruitless and supportive one of the others.

There is speech of statistics, as indicating the "chances"
whereby an individual may or may not be involved in some event.
Theosophy speaks of KARMA and indicates that it is a measure of
Nature's full sensitivity to every change in motive or to any act
that any one anywhere may originate or participate in.

At what level for instance, does a statistician exercise a
"cut-off" point? Having studied statistics, I found that their
arbitrary limits are not productive of EXACT results, only of
approximations as regards individuals involved. Statistics has
on the whole no "heart," as is insensitive. Karma is infinitely
sensitive and affords every individual spark of life its
appropriate place to grow and thrive in.

Theosophy and the doctrine of Karma takes into account every
possible level of differentiation as well as integration. No
omissions, No "dust under the rug." ALL.

Its coverage is from the minute and sub-atomic (to our view) up
to most infinite and undefinable limits of the UNIVERSE as a
WHOLE. Statistics deals with assumed averages and neglects
specifics. Karma deals with SPECIFICS only.

Many may not agree with this, but these are the some of the
doctrines of Theosophy that remain to be individually checked out
by individual students. Those students cannot be denied the
opportunity to purse their self-chosen work. And why should they
by words of discouragement?

If the area of misunderstanding can be clearly exposed perhaps we
can resolve this.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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




-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Schueler [mailto:gschueler@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 2:16 PM
To: Theosophy Study List
Subject: Law

<<<[Dallas:]We deal with a world and Universe that runs by law
only. No whims or chance or luck. >>>

I don't want to get into this all over again, but I do feel the
need to reiterate an esoteric position on this law business. "Law
only" is just not so, unless we have a very broad definition of
"law" because chaos is, in a sense, also "lawful." The statement
given above by Dallas is pure exotericism and is equivalent to
saying that nothing happens that is not God's will or that He has
every sparrow in the palm of his hand, and so on. In short, it
really doesn't say anything at all. Ask any statistician if
chance exists or not - in fact, we live in a world of
probabilities as quantum physics demonstrates and NOT in a world
of certainties as Dallas' continual remarks on law seem to
suggest. I suspect that statements such as this one comes from
taking literally a few remarks from the "core teachings" and
running with them as if they actually meant something, but I find
such statements to be very misleading.

I seek no debates on what to me is self-evident, and merely offer
my own opinion on what I think is a misunderstood subject. Peace.

Jerry S.

--



---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
dalval14@earthlink.net
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-14759P@list.vnet.net