Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00172)

Thursday, January 10, 2002

Dear Friend:

Many thanks for the notes you send me. Let me reply --


If I understand you correctly the "belief system" and our
"self-image" are possible variables. It appears to me that these
always reside along with as well as in contrast to REALITY
whatever that stable "background" may be.)


The "WE" remains undefined. Yet, acting as the WE -- we can
observe change. So we place our "WE" as a situation of stability
in our minds and memory.


Accepting the fact that "Authorities" are always questionable, it
seems that the WE sets itself us as a stable EXISTENCE. Perhaps
it is uncertain of its own nature, capacities, qualities and
records. But every question it produces implies those are there.
To be transcient implies permanence elsewhere, and all things are
seen as contrast, duality or some other numerical pattern. Yet
even that duality on any plane of perception is always overseen
by a TRANSCENDENCE.-- even if unnamed and indefinable. I think
we may call this a triangle, which on a plane sheet of paper
(outside the circle 0) is the first limited area defined by the
minimum of 3 lines. If we pass to a volume, outside of the
sphere we will have a tetrad, as a volume defined by six lines --
the 7th ( 6 + 1 = 7) being the thing in itself. Also
represented by Solomon's Seal --- the 2 interlaced triangles.

Even "perception" of change implies a TRANSCENDENCE that relies
on permanence. Mere naming something does not give an insight
into its essential nature or purpose. [ SPIRIT moving over the
face of the Waters (of chaos or eternity) ? ]

I agree that probables exist, but then, there too, we have a
background against which they identify their presence by
contrast. Maybe they are energies, or Forces, and possibly, they
are entitative Powers (?), and their unique nature is recorded
elsewhere on some other so far (to us) unidentified plane, but
merely removing phenomena to an unidentified level of noumena
does not give definition, as you rightly observe -- it merely
proves difference, and a potential series of interacting planes
of being. It also indicates to me that there is some
centralizing Power or Energy which remains to be explained, but
its presence is indicated by the cause for the phenomena it
projects, and which we notice. I find the S D seems to deal with
this far better than I can -- and in clearer terms.

Saying that "nothing is certain on this plane" does not imply
that ALL PLANES are also "uncertain." We simply do not know.
But there are (to me) always three things we may say we are
always certain of:

1)	We exist -- we observe and think and remember and compare...
We are a Force, a Power, and an Entity. Dare we use the word
"Monad" in manifestation ? [ ATMA-BUDHI-MANAS ]

2)	The Universe of multiplicity and contrast exists... [ There
are endless times, spaces and planes, but these are always
inter-related, and together they express "purpose." -- I think ]

3)	There is an ever-proceeding relationship between us (WE) and
the Universe -- and this may be "the Path." [ The theosophical
model is 7 Universal "Planes" emanating from the Absolute, and to
which correspond the 7 "principles" of each human being -- the
Microcosm -- a miniature Universe in himself, physically and
metaphysically ]

So I would say that rejection or acceptance of Theosophical
philosophy proves nothing except that we (and everyone else) are
FREE to make that kind of choice. I think this "freedom" is
ineradicable.

In Science the descriptions, demonstrations, laws and variances
relative to experience in a vast array of materials, everywhere,
tends to provide us with charts, maps, records, of
experimentation, etc... -- so that the average interaction of
various substances can be predicted. In other word the whole
effort of Science is to make order out of the unknown (chaos ?).
To this extent (reporting of facts) Science is most useful. But
when It speculates, hypothesizes, and theorizes on possible
"beginnings" we begin to have trouble, as Science is not
cognizant of any other plane than that of material effects.
Causes are generally not clearly definable or known to it.

No one asks you or me, or any one, to "fall for Theosophy." I am
as much against rote and "blind belief " as you ever are, or
were. I want to know. When I have tested and proved to myself
there is a logic, I offer my findings to others to be checked
out. I don't expect acceptance. In fact I would recommend
skepticism to all who ever approach any "ism" or philosophy.
And, incidentally, I had a friend who was a "Christian
Scientist." [ Last time I saw him, he had a dilemma on his
hands: his young teen-age daughter had been severely burned and
disfigured in a recent car accident. He was wondering what to do
for her and her future. I never heard of his final decision.
Yes, I am aware that "psychic" healing, and the "laying-on of the
hands" has accomplished cures and transformations -- but,. not
invariably. The exact mechanics of astral change which induces
corresponding physical change is known to very few indeed. This
is a vast are to be "checked out." ]

I have been to many meetings of various religious groups -- few
of them have ever openly (to my observation) mentioned that their
audience was FREE to investigate other faiths. But one's
experience is not a universally correct sample. There are very
few "faiths" which openly speak of the brotherhood of the Adepts
and the prophets, or indicate that all religions spring from th
same identical ROOT. Nor are their services FREE as true
spiritual matters ought to be.

An "AHA" experience -- such as one may occasionally achieve in
meditation (?), opens doors to concepts one has not realized were
related. One thing I believe I can reliably say: NATURE covers
in depth everything. It therefore seems to me reasonable for the
Atmic aspect of our natures to occasionally throw light on a
subject that the embodied mind needs to know about. I found that
the section in H P B's TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE
(BLAVATSKY: Collected Works (TPH) Vol. 10, pp 252 - 263) gives
some hints in the section on dreams.

Also let me be clear: I have never recommend THEOSOPHY as a
"belief system" To me "Theosophy" is a valuable word, like a
bag, it implies all that has been taught in its original
systematic (?) presentation. I would not recommend that any one
adopt it without a preliminary investigation. And then follow
that up with independent and continual cautious criticism of
anything it offers. "Acceptance" is not useful or wanted by any
true inquirer, but UNDERSTANDING is. One has to learn how to
THINK. This is not a subject ordinarily taught, as I have
discovered. Each human mind is independent and ought to be
respected as such. Proof is always interior. Evidence and
"logic" can be offered from the "outside."

Believe me, I can understand how you say "Atma is Maya." -- My
own vocabulary would then respond to your statement and then
render it to me in terms of my thinking, and say: If ATMA is
held to be a temporary construct from Manvantara to Manvantara --
and is a reality limited to that Manvantara only, then you are
correct. However, if ATMA transcends the Manvantaric and
Pralayic intervals as a CONTINUOUS REALITY, then ATMA is not
periodical, and therefore it is not "mayavic." In any case it
is One with the ABSOLUTE. [ Aside: Some years ago, in this
connection I came across in the
S D in Vol. 1 at the top of p. 130 a concept that seemed
puzzling: The TWO ONES. Seemed to be 1) the ABSOLUTE and 2)
ATMAN as the first UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE when one passes from the
non-manifest to the Highest Manifesting plane. Then came the
Monad on the 2nd (?) UNIVERSAL PLANE and from THAT was derived
(as I understand it) the UNIVERSAL MONAD -- {ATMA -- BUDDHI} --
(where Buddhi is Mulaprakriti or Primordial Root Matter, which
because of its purity, can alone act as "vehicle" for ATMA).]

As I see it my problem is that the time periods in consideration
do not trouble or restrict me. And I apply this to my own
continuity of consciousness so that the prospect of death does
not trouble me. This body will die in due course and the
Spiritual something? ATMA / BUDDHI? (the MONAD -- or whatever
we label we might attach to our being) will continue. -- that's
satisfactory. Logically, I cannot see it breaking off and
vanishing, and all this interesting study also disappearing. That
is a waste and I don't believe Nature is wasteful.

I also agree with you that the word "model" is a very good one,
and that the "filters" we may adopt from time to time ought to
be recognized as exactly that: "filters" -- which limit
perception. Also we ought not be confusing the "filtered" view
with the REALITY which transcends all filters. Reminds me of the
GAYATRI verse where the disciple asks the "golden vase" that
conceals the SUN to dissipate, so that he may see the "whole
truth" -- on my journey back to the "sacred Seat."

At least that is how my logic works.

I've enjoyed this conversation. Hope you find I agree in many
ways with your ideas. But, then I must give credit to Theosophy
for opening my eyes and deepening my perceptions. It is for this
reason that I support it, as it has supported me. But no one
ought to approach and enter into its ambit unless they are
prepared to bare their soul to the uttermost and learn so much
more in the ways of integration. I think "Brotherhood" says it
all, and also to a large extent, it does not tell the enthusiast
exactly how much work he will have to put in. So it a
continually growing experience. I also like and respond happily
to the concept that all is included. No barriers,
pre-conceptions or prejudices.

Thanks. Best wishes,

Dal

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


-----Original Message-----
From: G----d S-----er
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 6:14 AM
To:
Subject: to Dallas

<<<What precisely is a "BELIEF SYSTEM?">>>

In psychology a belief system and a worldview are virtually
identical. When we have an experience we always buck it up
against our belief system - how we view and interpret the world.
If it fits, our belief system or worldview is strengthened. If it
doesn't fit, then we have a problem which could result in
cognitive dissonance or in a significan emotional event, or even
insanity or suicide. Along with this belief system, we also have
a self-image, which is how we see ourselves, and this too must be
compared with our experience. Anyway, it is our belieef system
and self-image that determine who a person reacts to an event,
and as you know different people will react differently to the
same event.


<<<To most, any understanding of "belief" implies: "NO PROOF
EXISTS," or "AUTHORITY SAYS. ">>>

Dear Dallas, in our present human condition, there simply is no
final or ultimate PROOF or AUTHORITY at all. Period. There is no
proof that there is life after death. There is no proof that
there is not. There is no proof that that God exists. There is no
proof that there is no God. And so on. And there are countless
authorities, all telling us different things. For many people.
Jesus is such an authority. For many others, Buddha is such an
authority. But we have to decide who will serve as our own
authority, don't we?


<<<We might even say that it is a series of statements that
cannot be verified, or assembled in harmony together. Possibly
it arises from insecurity, inability to reason and observe, and,
from that, it is natural to see that fear may arise.>>>>

Dallas, as you know, nothing at all can be verified with
certainty. Quantum physics tells us that the underlying reality
of the entire universe is probabalistic. Chaos physics tells us
that there is a chaos factor or random element to every single
physical relationship. The only thing that is certain is that
nothing is certain.


<<<Theosophy on the other hand asks for close investigation and
offers proofs and demonstrations.>>>

Dear Dallas, as much as I really do respect you, the above is
pure bullshit. Name me one single PROOF that Theosophy gives to
the world. If such a thing existed, the world would all be
Theosophists. The fact that Theosophy has taken over the hearts
of less than one half of one percent of humanity should be enough
to tell us that its proofs are somewhat lacking. I used to be a
Christian Scientist, and I heard this same line all the time.
Christian Science has to be true because we can prove it and
demonstrate in our daily lives. Bullshit. I fell for this line as
a Christian Scientist for years, and shame on me if I fall for it
with Theosophy or anything thing else again.


<<<For thinking persons, this aspect of free investigation is
very satisfactory. >>>

Dallas, while I agree with you, you have to admit that ALL
religions teach free investigation. I hear this from our local
United Methodist minister when I occassionally attend church, and
I don't know of one single religion that doesn't encourage its
members to practice what is being preached, and to find Jesus in
their lives, etc. Buddha required his disciples to investigate
his teachings on their own and to demonstrate them for
themselves. Your whole line of reasoning here is not unique to
Theosophy.


<<<But for those who have not penetrated with their
minds the Objects of Theosophical study and work, they remain a
kind of threat. >>>

I submit that "pentration with the mind" is the wrong way to go
about it. Manas is not the answer, nor even the Path.


<<<One of the oldest methods of discrediting anything is to make
wild, unsupported and
unverified, unreferenced statements in a kind of attack. It
startles, confuses and disgusts many. Others, it leaves totally
unmoved. Yet, there is always a desire to "hear the other
side.>>>

I read attacks on Blavatsky before joining the TS. It gave me a
broader perspective, and I realized early on that many people
didn't like her or her message. So what? Its a free country.
Perhaps my own message, that atma is maya, startles and confuses
and disgusts you. But Dallas, I have at least planted the seed,
which in time may grow, and someday maybe you will accept that
this was Blavatsky's message all the time. The subtle idea that
atma is maya will remain buried in your unconscious for now, but
as you read and study, perhaps it will all of a sudden make sense
to you, and you will have an Aha experience. That is my hope,
because I really do like you, Dallas. While I may be completely
wrong in my views, please try to realize that my intentions are
good.


<<<Belief systems seem to rely on the apathy, ignorance and the
inertia of most of their adherents. But who wants to be
satisfied with unreferenced labels, when Wisdom is to be had
freely?>>>>

Dallas, you seem here to have a very weird idea of what a belief
system is. It is our own natural way of making sense of our
experiences. In a way, it serves as a filter, so that we can
direct or focus our mind in some particular area. And we will
always have one. You cannot throw your belief system away.
Anyway, Theosophy and the Theosphical core teachings provide us
with lots of material with which to tweak and expand our belief
system.


<<<Theosophy is an embodiment of the universal dynamism which we
call LIFE. >>>

Rather than "embodiment," I would say "model." Theosophy provides
us with a very nice workable universe model of the planetary
chain. All we humans can ever hope to do, is to experience Truth
and then model it, in order to share that experience with others.
But don't confuse the model with the experience. Don't confuse
the finger pointing to the moon with the moon itself.

J---y S.

CUT