Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00449)

Friday, November 23, 2001

Re: Opinion and the Phenomenal vs. Reality and strict
Logic


"Though this eternal essence of things may not be
perceptible by our physical senses, it may be
apprehended by the mind of those who are not wilfully
obtuse." (Isis vol 1, p. xii)



Dear Steve:

Kantian thought (and his "Critique of Pure Reason") is not a
possession or an invention of his, but merely (to my mind) serves
to identify a certain approach of the mind towards discovery and
verification. It has to be mathematically accurate to be useful.
Logical.

His propositions, and definitions are valuable and useful, but
they were in use ages before he set them down -- they are of
assistance towards one's search for the Entire TRUTH. They are
aids to thinking. The 6 Schools of Indian Philosophy indicate an
originality of perception which is centered around the 7th the
Synthesis of them all. I see this to be named THEOSOPHY in this
era.

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

Let's look at what H P B wrote in ISIS UNVEILED (you quoted)


1. ETERNAL ESSENCE to me is the eternal or permanent SOURCE and
CAUSE of any FORM, it implies an IDEAL from which many different
FORMS can be constructed or evolved or derived but the formation
of these implies "maya" or illusion.

They are partial and have a limited time-life of existence in
some chosen plane of manifestation, whereas the SOURCE or CAUSE
is permanent, and to me, would imply the stability of an
ORIGINAL -- either on the plane of the FIRST CAUSE, or even of
the anterior CAUSELESS CAUSE.

IT MAY BE APPREHENDED BY THE MIND OF THOSE WHO ARE NOT WILFULLY
OBTUSE implies to me that the MIND is capable of penetrating and
understanding anything that the WILL sets it to examine
impartially. This implies a WILLER in each human -- perhaps you
may permit the use of the word SPIRIT ?

WILFULLY OBTUSE to me implies that one deliberately adopts some
opinion or some aspect and is not WHOLLY impartial.

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


But, the "thinking" as a clear process (and not as the using of
something we take "for granted," or, "on faith") is something we
have to evolve on our own. If it is to be useful, then it has to
be free of "opinions." [Theosophically, Kama -- desires and
passions of the personal nature have to be eliminated. Higher
Manas ( Buddhi-Manas) has to be made operative.]

If we, acting as true scientists, desire to discover Nature's
hidden secrets (since she has placed them as the underlying basis
for our existence) we cannot allow any speculations of biases or
opinions weigh in any way in the strict exercise of logic, so as
to follow what she has developed. Her "secrets" will ever remain
secrets for us, if we approach them with anything else than a
pure desire to discover them and their operations and
ramifications.

I would say we have to select the "starting point" and then, we
have to WILL the mind (now employed as a tool), to follow a
strict impartial and universal sequence of logic.

If we start from premises we need to have the origin and cause of
those premises exposed. So long as we content ourselves with
starting with EFFECTS we lose contact with causation

The totality of thought-approaches ought to be considered as a
means to our individual grasp of Universal facts, absolutes and
truths.

Since we start in our WAKING CONSCIOUSNESS with the limits of a
physical brain and the overlay it has received since childhood of
educational, communal, and religious views -- some not factual at
all but only opinions -- out takes a while to get rid of those
handicaps and to restore to our thinking in this plane and mode
of uninfluenced thinking.

In other words we let the statements rest on their merit and not
on opinions we may have picked up and which tend to direct our
own thinking into other channels than direct logic and
perception.

I think this is difficult. Also we are handicapped in some
measure with a language that was not intended to be philosophical
or impersonal.

If we take as correct the view offered to us in The SECRET
DOCTRINE we find that the ONE SPIRIT emanated from the ABSOLUTE
is the starting point of evolution.

Patanjali states the reason (cause) for manifestation and
evolution as : "For the sake of the Soul alone the Universe
exists." Disagreement might arise as to the nature of the
"soul." But this is eliminated by the proposition that the
entire manifested Universe consists of immortal and eternal
MONADS, each being (in manifestation) SPIRIT/MATTER intertwined
and being viewed by MIND. [ ATMA - BUDDHI - MANAS ]

The "soul" being Manas, either functioning as an independent unit
or resident in potential -- as in an atom, a molecule, a grain of
sand or a drop of water, etc... the whole of Nature exhibits
degrees of Intelligence which depends on the progress and
experience of the individual Monad.

In brief we as humans as Minds are also brothers to each other,
as to the advanced Wise Men (however named) and also to the
merest atom or grain of sand.

I hope this proves to be of help.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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

DTB:
---------------------------------------

Let me add here a brief survey of Ancient Hindu Literature:


Hindu Literature (ancient):

1. PARA VIDYA Esoteric, Secret Wisdom, unrecorded, undisclosed
I
|__________________________________MANIFESTATION OCCURS
|
I
2. APARA VIDYA Exoteric Wisdom, recorded (oral, written)
+---------------+--------+---------+----------+
Shruti Smriti Purani Itehasa
VEDAS
revelation tradition myths history 1.
Exoteric 2. Esoteric explanations

Karma Kanda Jnana Kanda (codified by

Upanishads Veda Vyasa

I
VEDAS +------------+----------+--------------+-------I
Named: Rig Sama Yajur
Atharva
Content: hymns chants ritual
sacred incantations
Rishi: Brahma Jaimini Yajnavalkya
Vashishta, Narada, Visvamitra, etc.
I
I
In All Vedas :
+------------+-------------------+-----------------+
Content: Mantras | Shad Anjanis |
Aranyakas | Shad Darshanas
sound 6 Sciences
lore for 6 Philosophies

forest |

dwellers |

+--------------------------------------+
SHAD DARSHANA: 6 Philosophical Demonstrations

1. MATERIAL
Prakriti: 3 Schools
|
+--------------------+--------------------+
| Named: Vaisheshika Nyaya Purva
Mimansa
| Rishi: Kanada-rishi Gautama-rishi Jaimini
| Content: Doubt, Denial
Mantra meanings
|
2. SPIRITUAL
Purusha: 3 Schools
| +------------------+---------------+
| Named: Sankhya Yoga Uttara
Mimansa (Vedanta)
| Rishi: Kapila-rishi Yajnavalkya
Badarajna, Vyasa
| Patanjali
Shankaracharya
| Content: Evolving Man and God Atman: root
of Man & God
|
CONSCIOUSNESS IS ONE
|
+------------------------------------------------+
3. Vedanta :

+-----------------+-----------------------------+
3 Divisions Dvaita Vishistadwaita
Advaita
duality: merging of
Unity of All:
Man & God Man and God in Man is God
persist a Unity
Unity is ALL

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other ancient Hindu Literature:

Asavalayana Kalpa Sutra Ceremonial Directory
Nirukta . . . .
Expositions
Panini's Vyakarma . .
Grammar
Siksha . . . .
Phonetic Dictionary
Jyotisha . . . .
Astronomy & Astrology
Chhandra . . . .
Meter
Nighantu . . . .
Synonyms
Indra Gatha . . .
Hymns to the Moon
Nara Samsi . . .
Components of Man
Valkya Smriti Yajna . .
Sacrifice
Mahabharata/Ramayana . . Itehasa /
Epics
Jaimini Sutras . . .
Purva Mimansa / Vedanta
Brahma Sutras . . .
Uttara Mimansa / Vedanta
Upanishads . . .
Explanations of esoteric

Theosophy is a statement of facts in Nature. As a
philosophy it is eclectic and includes all in its purview. It
investigates all phenomena, and relates those observations to its
lore, constantly checking and verifying independent observations,
and comparing those with the
records of the past.

Theosophy is the combination of all of these, considered
in their interrelation, the entire system of learning and
knowledge leading to all-inclusiveness. It is the 7th System:
Sanatana Dharma, the Perennial Philosophy, which unites them all.

Mote: Modern versions of the Upanishads, owing to
abridgments in Akbar's reign may be inaccurate. [ Theosophy v.
20, p. 19; Theosophist v. I p. 25, 50, 246; Theosophy v. 2, p.
329. ]





-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Stubbs [mailto:stevestubbs@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:36 AM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Is maya the same thing as phenomenal?

Someone recently offered the opinion that Blavatsky
was not a Kantian, and that her concept of maya could
therefore not be understood in Kantian terms. Fair
enough, although Kant's influence is so pervasive that
it is doubtful whether any learned person can be said
to be altogether uninfluenced by him. Nonetheless, I
had lingering doubts, and purely by accident (are
there any accidents?) came across the following
statements in ISIS UNVEILED. I offer it merely for
what it is worth. First she says with regard to
Ultimate Reality:

"Though this eternal essence of things may not be
perceptible by our physical senses, it may be
apprehended by the mind of those who are not wilfully
obtuse." (Isis vol 1, p. xii)

The statement that something is not "perceptible by
our physical senses," and yet that "it may be
apprehended by the mind of those who are not wilfully
obtuse" is the definition of a noumenon. Noumena are
not perceived directly, but are inferred from
phenomenal experience.

Now read this, which comes a little later:

"In the allegory of the chariot and winged steeds,
given in the Phaedrus, [Plato] represents the
psychical nature as composite and twofold; the
thumos, or epithumetic part, formed from the
substances of the world of phenomena; and the
thumoeides, the essence of which is linked to the
eternal world. The present earthlife is a fall
and punishment. The soul dwells in 'the grave which we
call the body,' and ... the noetic or spiritual
element is 'asleep.' Life is thus a dream, rather than
a reality. Like the captives in the subterranean cave,
described in The Republic, the back is turned to the
light, we perceive only the shadows of objects, and
think them the actual realities."

This is clearly a reference to our natural tendency to
accept phenomena as realities, when in truth they are
representations of reality and not the things in
themselves. Colors, sounds, etc., exist only in
consciousness and not in nature. She then immediately
asks:

"Is not this the idea of Maya, or the illusion of the
senses in physical life, which is so marked a feature
in Buddhistical philosophy?" (Isis vol. 1, pp. xiii,
xiv)

Kant rules!

Steve




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just
$8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1



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