Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00190)

Dallas, thanks for your very thoughtful post. I enjoyed it very much. The following are some nit-picks and technicalities that are really just suggestions and thoughts.


<<<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.)>>>

Dear Dallas, your qualifier "possible" is probably unnecesary. Our worldview and our self-image combine to form our karmic reality. They are exactly what we think reality is at any given point in space-time. Your "REALITY" here is an absolute, and would equate with the divine Monad or perhaps divinity itself. Until we reach that ultimate point as we go along our Path, our only reality will continue to be our worldview and our self-image. 

The reason why Vajrayana works so well (and magic in general), is that it includes deliberate conscious efforts to change our worldview and our self-image. In a nutshell, in Deity Yoga we actually change our self-image into a deity and our worldview into a mandala, and in this way change our reality from material to spiritual. Normal meditation does this too, but is much slower.

Karma does NOT effect us as we really "are" (whatever that is?) but as we think we are. Understanding this is the key to overcoming karma.


<<<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.>>>

Unfortuneately there is simply no way that we can place our self into a situation of stability. The self, and it doesn't even matter how we define it, is ALWAYS instable and changing because it is ALWAYS mayavic. In fact, it is the very belief in a permanent self and a clinging onto it, that perpetuates karma and maya throughout countless reincarnations.


<<<Accepting the fact that "Authorities" are always questionable, it seems that the WE sets itself us as a stable EXISTENCE.>>>

This "seems" is an illusion. Rather than clinging to a permanent self, we need to let it go.


<<<To be transcient implies permanence elsewhere, and all things are seen as contrast, duality or some other numerical pattern. >>>

Yes, but the transcience is only so in contrast with the permanence and vice versa. Neither exists without the other. We cannot have permanence without trancensience lurking in the background waiting to bite.



<<<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.>>>

Absolutely agreed. However, in the case in point, the transcendence is from manas or thinking altogether. We transcend conceptualization. This appears to manas to be death, but it is actually a more purified life.


<<<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) ? ]>>>

Agreed. But the reason why duality has such a hold on people is that most people try to grasp onto one polar side and to eliminate or throw away the other polar side. Materialists cling to matter and don't accept spirit. Moralists cling to good and try to eliminate evil. Men try not to be feminine. Doctors grasp onto health and try to eliminate disease. And so on. This is all a play of maya. Acccepting both sides of all dualities as being like two sides of the same coin gives us a whole new perspective on life.


<<<Saying that "nothing is certain on this plane" does not imply that ALL PLANES are lso "uncertain." We simply do not know.>>>

Uncertainty allows for changes to come about. Without uncertainty there would be no Path, or evolution, but only a continual changeless stagnation. 


<<<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 ]>>>

Dallas, I can't argue with this, and wouldn't want to. However, I do believe strongly that "we" exist conventionally, and that all six lower principles are conditionally real and that only atma is ultimately real. Having said that, I would also add that even ultimate reality is ultimately conditional. I know that this sounds nihilistic, but it is really not so.


<<<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 ]>>>

OK, but again I think this all has conditional reality. The external worlds are all subject to changes, and thus none are permanent, and thus all are mayavic.


<<<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 ]>>>

Your three certainties above sound very much like my own I-Not-I Monad only using different words. (Your 3rd above, the link that connects I and Not-I, is fohat.) These three certainties hold throughout our entire 7-plane solar system.


<<<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.>>>

How about the freedom to interpret Theosophy where it conflicts with itself? Thats all I am asking for.


<<<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 ?).>>>

Yes, and it is all done via observations. Observations of ourselves and of our world are all that we can possibly do as human beings. Theosophy, like science, is all about the observations of people, records of their personal experiences. Science makes direct and indirect observations on the physical plane. Psychologists make indirect observations on the astral and mental planes. Theosophists make direct obervations on all 7 planes. 



<<<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.>>>

OK, but science does acknowledge this "trouble" and labels their theories as such. In almost 100 years, no one has yet disproved Einstein's relativity and yet science is careful to call it a theory nonetheless. Why can't Theosophy be like that? Why can't Theosophists acknowledge that the SD contain theories as well as "facts?" Blavatsky's evolutionary scheme outlined in the SD should be accepted as a theory, a model, and then we - her students - should be free to try to prove or disprove it. It should not be considered as a Bible and every word taken as literally true.

Jerry S.
--