Theos-Talk Archives (September 2001 Message tt00260)

In a message dated 9/20/01 7:26:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
IronGround@aol.com writes:

> In a message dated 9/20/01 10:42:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> eldon@theosophy.com writes:
> 
> > At 10:06 AM 9/20/01 -0400, you wrote:
> > 
> > >:-) Hi - would like to ask a question. I've read most of the Secret
> > >Doctrine - read some portions many times - seem to remember
> > >somewhere Blavatsky saying something like: "for the World is
> > >destroyed and then created again hundreds(?) of times every 
> > >second" - anyone remember that? - anyone have any idea what she
> > >might have meant by that? I think she just made that statement
> > >but didn't attempt to explain it.
> > 
> > There are different Manvantaras, different cycles of existence.
> > Some deal with vast periods of time, like the age of the earth.
> > The earth's life would be a Planetary Manvantara, 8.64 billion
> > years. (This includes 4.32 billion years for the period of activity
> > and another 4.32 billion years for the period of dissolution, the
> > Pralaya that follows.) This period is sometimes called a day in
> > the life of Brahma.
> > 
> > At the far end of the scale in terms of shortness in a type of
> > Manvantara that is continuous. It happens instantaneously. Every
> > moment things are newly created. This type of cycle, which you
> > refer to, has to do with the fact that the Eternal Now is 
> > constantly being renewed out of nothingness, continuously self-
> > arising.
> > 
> > It cannot refer to one's specific station in life, or one's
> > evolutionary goals. It happens too fast to refer to anything
> > we can possibly do. It is faster than a measurable unit of
> > time. Therefore, we can see that it refers to a type of
> > creation that is higher, more basic and primal that the self
> > that does things in the world. It refers, I think, to the
> > ever-present will-to-be that keeps the universe in place and
> > allows us to exist.
> > 
> > -- Eldon
> > 
> >:-) Hi - very interesting ideas - I like those ideas a lot! - the cycles 
I 
> was talking about being the Eternal Now constantly arising - I thought of 
> that type of thing before, but for some reason it never occured to me to 
> apply that to Blavatsky's statement - thanks - but arising out of 
> nothingness? - isn't that what the Bible says? - something Blavatsky 
didn't 
> agree with, and I don't really like that idea too much either, if I 
> understand correctly what you mean by nothingness.
> 
> I like Leadbeater's idea - 

>:-) That's what I wrote last week - right after I posted that I thought that 
I should have wrote that differently - here's my amended version:

thanks - but arising out of nothingness? I'm not sure what you mean by that. 
And I'm also not completely sure about what you mean by the Eternal Now. If 
by some chance you're talking about the creation of the World itself, then 
your comment reminds me of what the Bible says, I think - God creating the 
World out of nothing - an idea Blavatsky didn't like, and I don't like that 
idea either.

I like Leadbeater's idea -


Well, maybe that's just a little thing that no one even noticed, but like I 
said, I noticed it right after I posted that. I like to be respectful of 
other people's ideas, and my first reply seems a little blunt - sorry, in 
case anyone besides me noticed that - g'Day! >:-) Grounge