Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00172)

Dear Dallas,
I don't know if you remember but I have talked about nature and it's implications. We are a part of nature, and as a part of nature we are subject to it's laws. Pure and simple. Because nature is a force that is God, all we have to do is live rightly in the bounds of nature. God is not wrathful, he is natural. Toaism comes as close to this as is possible within the realm of human thought. All this philosophising is basically nothing but lip service. I know the study is fun, but God has it in hand, because he created us as an extension of nature in order to be it's facilitator. The mindful exercise is great, but it is but sport.
Daniel

----- Original Message -----
From: dalval14@earthlink.net
Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 5:25 AM
To: basic@blavatsky.net
Subject: Theos-World RE: [bn-basic] past/present/future

Sunday, November 11, 2001

Dear Adelasie:

How does the past relate to the future?


There is no question that our minds situated in these physical
bodies of ours are self-limited, usually to the needs and desires
and wants or fancies associated with our "desire" natures and
"bodily needs."

We are composed of physical matter and interior to this
marvelously intricate mechanism of our bodies, are the
mysterious areas of desire, passion, needs, wants, and the power
of the Mind to inquire and to find out why and how things really
are. How do we become wise?

But since we are able to question these, and discuss them among
ourselves, there is an indication there that we are aware of
something transcendent. Ideals. Improvements. Making
EXCELLENCIES. Do these not hint at higher values than those
merely concentrated on our personal and selfish well-being?


Virtue and Vice (or Sin)

I have been puzzled over the general reluctance to discuss
"virtue." Also "vice." Also the ethico-moral level of life.
One seems to shy away from such discussion as though it were
unhealthy. But is that so, or do we merely lack the mental
acquaintance with ethics an morality to be able to discuss these
things.

These matters are generally relegated to the priests and padres
of our lives -- people who are supposed to have studied "God's
Will," and who claim (sometimes weekly) to know more about the
reasons for our existence, and the best way for us to live and
behave than we, the average man and woman, does.


Nature: What does she offer?

Suppose one were to adopt the simple view: NATURE ( or God
immanent -- embodied in all creatures) has laid down, and has in
operation a vast and intricate lattice-work of rules and laws --
some of those we call chemistry, physics, morals, ethics,
behaviour, character, instinct, intuition, give-and-take,
community living, and the "territorial imperative" of selfishness
and personal isolation.

Nature has laws in place. If we harmonize -- we "do good." If
we attempt to isolate ourselves, and to destroy those Laws in our
favor -- being selfish and unfair to others, we are said to "do
evil." Or, "to sin."


We need to do the Proving.

We all need to prove this out. Is it really so simple? If not,
what makes obstructions?
Are we going to devote a part of our lives to studying these
questions or do we prefer not to?
I don't know if this is of any help, but these are lines I have
been working on for a long time.

NATURE IS A HARMONY OF DIVERSITIES. ( I think all will agree to
that. But, Why? what are the implications? How will any
knowledge concerning this help improve our lives? )

For instance: Are Thoughts and Feelings the same or separate
things? Can we think about our feelings, and can we feel about
our thoughts? If we answer yes, then WHO ARE "WE". Some may say
"the Soul." But does that close the investigation or only open
it wider? What does a "Soul" do? Does it follow US around like
a kind of shadow? Does it function on its own? How does it
affect us? Is it useful? Precious? Unnecessary? How do we
find out? Does Theosophy have anything to offer on this?

The Least as well as the greatest entities are "taken care of in
a "balanced" way -- and very little imposition of unfairness is
ever noticed, in spite of "accidents."

Can we say there is a Universal KARMA ?

Is there a National Karma? Is there "family Karma? And finally
is there personal Karma? Who starts it and why and how ?

Still puzzled and still studying and trying to learn,

Best wishes,

Dallas

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



-----Original Message-----
From: adelasie [mailto:adelasie@surfari.net]
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2001 10:55 AM
To: basic@blavatsky.net
Subject: [bn-basic] past/present/future

Dear Basic people,

Lately it is becoming more important than ever to me to discover
the application/revelation of theosophical teachings in daily
life.


Reading over the syllabus text for our current study thread, I
was
struck by a question.

How does the paragraph on the ephemeral nature of what we call
the present inform our understanding of our reality?

Viewed from the perspective of that paragraph, any event or
series of events or conditions, no matter how impressive to our
mundane sensibilities, would appear to be nothing more than a
tiny
ripple in the vast ocean of being, hardly worthy of notice.

Is it
possible to incorporate this sort of perspective in our everyday
conception of life around us? And would that be helpful to us at
all,
individually or generally?

Thoughts anyone? (text copied below)

Adelasie


> (HPB, Secret Doctrine, Vol I, p. 37)
> (a) Time is only an illusion produced by the succession of our
states
> of consciousness as we travel through eternal duration, and it
does
> not exist where no consciousness exists in which the illusion
can be
> produced; but "lies asleep." The present is only a mathematical
line
> which divides that part of eternal duration which we call the
future,
> from that part which we call the past. Nothing on earth has
real
> duration, for nothing remains without change-or the same-for
the
> billionth part of a second; and the sensation we have of the
actuality
> of the division of "time" known as the present, comes from the
> blurring of that momentary glimpse, or succession of glimpses,
of
> things that our senses give us, as those things pass from the
region
> of ideals which we call the future, to the region of memories
that we
> name the past. ....The real person or thing does not consist
solely of
> what is seen at any particular moment, but is composed of the
sum of
> all its various and changing conditions from its appearance in
the
> material form to its disappearance from the earth. It is these
> "sum-totals" that exist from eternity in the "future," and pass
by
> degrees through matter, to exist for eternity in the "past."
.....Even
> so of persons and things, which, dropping out of the to-be into
the
> has-been, out of the future into the past - present momentarily
to our
> senses a cross-section, as it were, of their total selves, as
they
> pass through time and space (as matter) on their way from one
eternity
> to another: and these two constitute that "duration" in which
alone
> anything has true existence, were our senses but able to
cognize it
> there.
>


---
Current topic is at
http://www.blavatsky.net/talk/bnbasic/basicSyllabus.htm
You are currently subscribed to bn-basic as:
[dalval14@earthlink.net]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
leave-bn-basic-6660818H@lists.lyris.net




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]