Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00120)

Tuesday, January 08, 2002


Dear Adelasie:

Many thanks.


I found a serious error in something I sent you (and you quoted
back) It should have been WITHOUT.


> By the way, in recent acrimonious cross-fire comments, the only
> ones worth paying attention to are those that are specific --
> quoting chapter and verse. if any one is so careless as to put
> forward anything WITHOUT adequate "BACK-UP" it really is not
worth
> taking notice of. However, thinking of the potential wide
> audience, and the effect on them of information they would find
> it difficult to verify, it is necessary to protest or to
readjust so
> many things.


We are all STUDENTS, even when we may be rated "Adepts." Look at
the way the Masters write in MAHATMA LETTERS
They show that they have THEIR MASTERS and that there are rules
and laws in the Universe that require careful "avoidance" [in
giving information] or "interfering," or "guiding," or
"assisting."

As to providing such information as I have gleaned. It is a
pleasure. I only hope others will be inspired (as I was) to
persevere, and to actually discover for themselves the accuracy
and fulfillment that can be had from a deep study of THEOSOPHY.
It does not eliminate hardships of various kinds, but it does
eliminate the sense of isolation and of despair that can
seemingly come out of "nowhere."

You are right that true wisdom comes from WITHIN == from the
HIGHER SELF. There we are all ONE TOGETHER WHOLE.
But it would seem that one of the tasks of those who have
attained such a state is to volunteer to remain with humanity and
Nature and continuously assist. In so doing they of course seem
to be able to prove the philosophy even deeper.

I have been puzzled fro some years now by the seeming phrasing
found in The SECRET DOCTRINE that would indicate there are TWO
EGOS in man. Let me give you some page references and see what
you make of them

[ SECRET DOCTRINE I 105, 210, 130, 267, 574, 610; II 87, 161,
241, 246, 254-5, 275.

Then in TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE, pp. 66 - 78 -- we
find the puzzling description of the confabulation that goes on
nightly during deep sleep between the Embodied Self (I presume
this is Kama-Manas -- the altruistic side of it) and the HIGHER
SELF ( ATMA-BUDDHI) It looks as though there were TWO EGOS in
Man: One is the WISE MONAD represented in our "principles" by
ATMA-BUDDHI-MANAS. The other is a Monad "of lesser experience"
(see SECRET DOCTRINE I 634, 619, ) It is the "son," the "pupil"
of the OTHER who acts as an advisor -- a tutor - only.

I also agree that real meditation is HIGH CONCENTRATION. But the
selection and the reasoning have to be very rigorous, pure, and
have as motive the acquirement of knowledge that can help others.
It is always an ACTIVE state and not a PASSIVE one.

Best wishes to you as always.

Will hope to hear from you later.



-----Original Message-----
From: adelasie
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 4:09 PM
To:
Subject: RE: COMMENTS IN GENERAL

On 7 Jan 02, at 3:20, dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:


Dear Dallas,

It is very gratifying to find someone who sees as clearly as you
do
and who can explain things so well. I couldn't say that strongly
enough.


> Of course meditation is implied -- but the actual practice of
> meditation has to be carefully defined because many people
think
> it is making the mind a "blank." As I understand it, it is
most
> intense and careful -- an attempt to get at the CAUSE of any
> proposition, and then see how it fits in with all the rest. Is
not
> the life of the adept, a life of continual meditation? It has
to
> become "second nature, and effortless."

Concentration is the word that signifies meditation most
succinctly
to me. When one can bring the consciousness to a condition of
concentrated attention in the moment, upon whatever is
appropriate, one will have really learned to meditate. Our minds
tend to jump around a lot, but practice will lead the student in
the
right direction. Trying too hard, however, is dangerous. As you
say,
effortlessness is desireable.
>
> I would say that sincerity and honesty are the only parameters
in
> which true meditation will ever operate. Anything else is
> self-delusional.

Indeed, sincerity and honesty are prerequisites for any progress
in
occultism at all, certainly for meditation. I have the idea that
one
offers oneself, all one is, all one has, for the benefit of the
whole.
"Thy Will, not my will, be done," defines the correct attitude
for me.
>
> Besides "altruism," I would say, Occultism implies a very
> comprehensive knowledge of things, right down to their roots --
> causes, motives and forces -- and the potential effects any
> action will lead to. Always -- we have to universalize.
Always
> we have to pay close attention to the details that will be
> affected by our motives in any kind of action. It's the effort
> to change for the better (the WISER) , I think.

Didn't Judge say, "In the last analysis, consciousness is
everything." Our lives are like research facilities. Each one has
the
perfect set-up for the lessons he needs to learn in any given
incarnation. When we can begin to see what the research is, what
position we occupy in regard to others, situations, conditions
(self-
responsibility, always) we begin to take control of ourselves and
our
lives. And yes, motive motive motive. We grow in consciousness
as we learn about ourselves, and the next step is to recognize
our
connection with all others, all life. And there motive is
paramount.
Do we wish to help others, or do we only wish to help ourselves?
Honesty comes in handy here. Not comfortable, sometimes, but
really essential. Because if we can't be honest with ourselves,
how
can we hope to be honest with anyone? Of course, our real self
knows all, all the time. But we still have to learn it tiny piece
by tiny
piece.
>
> I also agree, if I reed you correctly, that it is our DUTY to
> defend the Teachings and the Teacher, once we are convinced of
> their accuracy, viability and truth. What else can we do? If
we
> remain silent, then we give our acquiescence to some form of
lie and
> cowardice.

Yes, it is one's duty. Unquestionably. It is a matter of loyalty.
If our
teacher is attacked, we rush to the defense. Loyalty is one of
the
most important qualities to develop in ourselves. When the time
comes that we are accepted as a chela of a Master, we will find
our
loyalty to be our most precious posession. After all, we owe so
much to those who blazed the trail for us to see the light of
truth
through the ancient teachings once again. Others may not agree,
and may even ridicule such devotion, but that does not matter.
What matters is if one knows the connection in one's own heart.
>
> The word "theosophist" is loosely used, and really ought to be
> restricted to those who are STUDENTS, endeavoring to practice
> Theosophy 100% in their lives. One really ought to consider
how
> was it possible for an H P B to exist, or a Jesus, or a Buddha,
> or a Krishna, or a Pythagoras -- and so on down the line of
> historically known Great Ones.

I don't want to restrict anyone. I have known very fine people
who
lived their lives strictly according to what I have been able to
understand to be Nature's laws, but who didn't have any power to
understand the fine points of the teachings. And I know brilliant
people who call themselves students and who flout those laws with
abandon, and even brag about it. But who am I to decide which is
more worthy? My business is to deserve the title "theosophist"
myself, and let the others do the best they can. There is
evidently a
level of mystery which some simply do not even believe could
exist, much less have some sort of reverence for. But it is that
mystery that draws me on, and keeps my feet stumbling along the
path. I fall off yes, but it keeps me climbing back on. It is a
promise
of someday knowing, being, the best that I can imagine, and more.
Is not that ultimate source of perfection the source also of the
great
teachers you mention?
>
> (Did I ever send you a copy of the chronological review made up
> some years back of the many aspects of ancient study that have
> been covered in Theosophical literature? You might be
interested. Let
> me know.) I can send it as an ATTACHMENT. I use the NORTON /
> SEMANTEC virus system and have every incoming or outgoing
document
> security checked. May I send this to you, at least to look at.
It
> may be valuable for th future.

Yes indeed, please do send it to me.
>
> Separately I sent out to all to look at a chronological
> bibliography of the early and ORIGINAL teachings of THEOSOPHY
for
> this, our modern era. I see I have a few errors I didn't
catch. So am
> sending it again as an attachment hereto.
>
> I don't think very much of "scholarship: in my personal self --
> it is to my mind only an attempt to draw together the
information that
> any one who seeks for it will find.

Dallas you are very modest, but I can say quite honestly that I
have met very few in this life who had such a comprehensive
knowledge of theosophical literature as you have. It is evidence
of
an immense amount of work, study and application as well, since
you couldn't know what you know without testing it out on
yourself,
so to speak. And you are so generous about sharing it. I really
appreciate that. It must take a lot of time and energy to supply
the
material you do, but it is very valuable.
>
> By the way, in recent acrimonious cross-fire comments, the only
> ones worth paying attention to are those that are specific --
> quoting chapter and verse. if any one is so careless as to put
> forward anything with adequate "BACK-UP" it really is not worth
> taking notice of. However, thinking of the potential wide
> audience, and the effect on them of information they would find
> it difficult to verify, it is necessary to protest or to
readjust so
> many things.

I guess I worry about that wide audience, the imaginary beginner
who stumbles upon some flame-throwing and goes away thinking
this is theosophy. It is so important for the sincere student to
make
of himself an example of what he studies. But on the other hand,
we are what we are, a motley collection indeed, and I include
myself in that collection for sure. So we carry on, doing the
best we
can, and have faith that the law will provide the opportunities
we
deserve to be of some use.
>
Thanks very much for the Chronological bibliography. It is a good
resource.

Best wishes to you as always,
and by the way, I will be out of town and off list for 10 days or
so,
so if I don't respond to something, be patient, I'll be back,

Adelasie