Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00202)

Saturday, January 12, 2002


Dear Jerry:

Many thanks --- Some notes below, answers, queries?

Best wishes

Dal

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

-----Original Message-----
From: G----d S-----r
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 6:32 AM
To:
Subject: Re to Dallas



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.

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

DTB	Our world-view and / or self-image imply (as I read the
implications) that they are transients. They are apparently
created by imagination as constructs. As our experience and
wisdom develop they change. Yet somewhere there has to be a kind
of IDEAL. I wonder if that was what the Buddha refers to --
without being dogmatic. No one, - even the wisest desires to
straight-jacket the thoughts and efforts of another.

If those are "constructs" and subject to modification, then The
WE are still relatively (?) stable -- the panorama of the "self"
and the "other" alter in relation to two "stabilities" MYSELF as
"Perceptor" and the UNIVERSE as a collection of PERCEPTIONS.

If the Universe is crowded with "divine Monas" all at various
levels of experience, the question of the unity of the One Spirit
is settled -- as they all are inter-correspondents. Idealism and
altruism are perhaps words we use to clothe ideas of
excellence -- which are impersonal and universal reference
points -- perhaps reposing in what Theosophy calls MAHA-BUDDHI,
and in each Monad in evolution the BUDDHI as a "matter" of
sufficient refinement so as t be able to stand the "fiery
effulgence" of the ATMA as the ONE UNIVERSAL TRUTH. Or, is this
exaggerated?

I Think The SECRET DOCTRINE deals with "reality in S D I pp
37 - 41 ?

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


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.

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

DTB	I understand I think the symbology involved. May I offer (in
my terms) WILL is the one Power of the interior immortal and
stable ATMA. Using that, "WE" change our concepts. "Deity Yoga"
is then as I might put it, the purified LOWER MIND (Self) able to
act in perfect concord with the ATMA -- the "mandala" -- the
"world-view" we make of the "universe-mandala" changes from
"material-limited" to "SPIRITUAL-UNIVERSAL." As the Hindus would
have it the devotee becomes ONE WITH BRAHMAN ( or Siva, or
Vishnu).

Yes, if may be a slower "path." But the work involved is not
alone for the Atma to "KNOW ITSELF," but rather, for all Monads
(as ATMA-BUDDHI), to "known themselves as Monads with growing
experience and the Will to be self-purified. [ This would give
rise to a concept of ethical / moral behavior, always moderated
by the ONE SELF. And in the process to spiritualize all the
"lower principles" of every personality.

It is the advanced SPIRITUAL MONAD -- the WISE ONE -- in each of
us, to work to assist without any coercion the Monad of lesser
experience (we call, for short, the Lower Self, or Kama-Manas)
[I seem to detect this concept in the following pages of The
SECRET DOCTRINE -- do you have time to scan them? -- S D II
167, 241-3, 246, 254-5, 273, 275; I 210, 267, 105, 130,
246-7, 574]

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

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.

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

DTB	according to the Jain philosophers the universe is embodied
Karma. All the "principles" are various levels of Karmic bonds.
Their concept is to attain "Liberation" (from Karma) and thus
stop the painful "wheel" of rebirth. They do not (at least among
those I have spoken with) conceive of the self-sacrificial aspect
put forward in S D II 246, S D I 207-210.

As I see it the WISE, regardless of designation, consider it an
eternal duty to live "in the 'world' and be of assistance through
advice (never action) to those "Monads of lesser experience" [ S
D I 632, 610 ]

My problem is: that if I, as a wise and Spiritual Being, having
purified my "lower vehicles" and gotten rid of "personal Karmic
attachments" have the right to retire to Nirvana. But although
this may be abstraction for a very long time, it would seem ( S D
II 79-80 ) as though Nirvana for ME, comes to an end when all
the Egos of my "class" reach, eventually, the level which I had
achieved earlier.

If that is the case, then why take "time-out" for a long period
of doing nothing? Of course I ask this today with and through my
own Lower Manas -- conceiving that inactivity must be extremely
boring and any activity would be preferable. So why not decide
to keep working -- and incidentally, preaching and illustrating
the "Good Law ?"

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


<<<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.

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

DTB	That is why I think the S D is correct in positing the "TWO
EGOS" in Man concept. They are really ONE, yet apparently
two-fold, wit the second ONE identifying itself with its
conditions and perceptions -- as we do in the HERE AND NOW of
this moment and era -- Yet the fact that we are able to think of
something ideal, altruistic, transcendent -- a "better I," gives
me hope that we can thereby prove the existence of the HIGHER
SELF as [my "Father"] -- the SPIRITUAL ONE which is already "in
residence." [ I got this concept originally through thinking
over what H P B says in TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE, pp.
66 -78. ( BLAVATSKY: Collected Works (TPH) Vol. 10, pp 252 --
263 ) See if that strikes you as a possibility

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



<<<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.


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

DTB	Exactly -- the Permanent, allows the Impermanent (One) to
fight and work itself up to wisdom which ought to be
permanency -- as universal Vision -- Samma Sambuddha -- The
Permanent can only advise, and does this nightly as well as at
other times through "Intuition" and "the Voice of Conscience."
This is similar to the ideas in B. Gita ]

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



<<<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.

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

DTB	Agreed. But, if we are aware of this, then the implication
(to me ) is that the two are under the "vision, and scrutiny" of
a still HIGHER TRANSCENDENCE -- Does this chain of Spiritual
Perception not also infinitely recede -- as far as we might be
able to think back to any possible "beginning of IMMORTALITY."
Now, that is a real paradox.

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


<<<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.

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

DTB	Also agreed, but choosing to use the concept of MANAS, we may
also agree to the UNIVERSAL MIND MAHAT which the S D places
along with the UNIVERSAL MONAD as the concept of an equipoised
TRIANGLE.

I imagine that we might proceed from symbol t symbol, ever upward
(or is it backward ?) to the SOURCE of all "this" -- the
CAUSELESS CAUSE -- KARANA . And in this word resides the root
KAR -- action. If we look at the 3 gunas (universal qualities),
that constitute the balance of NATURE, the dynamic actor is RAJAS
(Kama as KAMADEVA -- see The THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY p. 170-1)
Rajas also implies activity, circular motion, the balance of
attraction and repulsion, planning cohesion and dispersion, need
and desire, but ever a circular motion of "forms" and components"
around a non-physical CENTER -- a POWER or FORCE -- for which we
have no ready definitions. We have only a sense of necessity:
IT MUST BE THERE.

I think most words are inadequate at this point

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



<<<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.

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

DTB	I cannot conceive of a "throw away." I can conceive of
layers of "monads" which are striving to become self-conscious --
as an effort of Nature (under Karmic Law) to provide embodiment,
at one level or another, for the brilliant light of the ATMA to
live and work in and through "matter." I think I am right in
seeing in S D I 632 several of these levels hinted at.

I agree with your illustrations -- those they perceive form a
limited goal, as the "ideal reality" is that difference (or
exaggeration) magnifies change. It is the playground of what I
might call the Kamic attitude. It provides a basis for limited
DESIRE -- and the limitation provides a basis for error, as some
do not yet see the transcendence that reconciles both.

I wonder if this is acceptable?

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



<<<Saying that "nothing is certain on this plane" does not imply
that ALL PLANES are also "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.

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

DTB	I do agree fully with this.

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



<<<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.

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

DTB	Again I would say "Quite true." But perception of conditions
(as mutable limits, transitory in time and space) always implies
the simultaneous existence of that which "stands on High,
unaffected -- Kutastha" as the VOICE OF THE SILENCE expresses
it.

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


<<<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.

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

DTB	Again, agreed. FOHAT is defined by S D as Divine or
Spiritual ELECTRICITY ( but then "electricity" is the Power that
induces CHANGE. Is it perhaps an aspect of the UNIVERSAL WILL?
It is the cause for the action between "forms" or the many Monads
(of lesser experience) that aggregate (under Karma) to make up
the transitory forms at any one time ?

FOHAT is a study in itself. Its origin, its purpose, how it
moves, what effects are caused by it. Do we using our "desires
and passions" generate it ? Is it associated very closely with
Karma ? Does it then perhaps imprint on the plastic nature of the
Monads (of lesser experience) the "KARMA' [good or bad] that is
the product of human MOTIVES. And so we may be back to the power
of WILL again.

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



<<<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.

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

DTB	I am quite sure that is one of th primary purposes of putting
Theosophical literature into the world at this juncture. But I
would strongly recommend that we all go to the primary source
first.

I mean to H P B and her writing certified to by the MASTERS OF
WISDOM whom she claimed to represent, -- and this is not :

"FUNDAMENTALISM" in the "nasty sense" of being rigid, single
minded and dogmatic. It is only saying that the best of
short-cuts (in my esteem) lies there, and is always in the grasp
(to compare, to accept or to reject) of the diligent and
anxiously attentive student or devotee. In any case the student
will make up his own mind and hew his own "Path" through the
Jungle of maya and the karmic barriers his early choices have
prepared for him.

Do you think FREE-WILL is related to Fohat as an energy we might
be unconsciously using when we make choices?

I do think our "freedom" relates to the integrity of the Monad
(ATMA-BUDDHI-MANAS) which we are fundamentally and spiritually.

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


<<<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.


DTB	AGREED




<<<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.


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

DTB	I THINK THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT h p b DESIRED. She says (to my
reading) this in her Prefaces and Introductions to The SECRET
DOCTRINE and ISIS UNVEILED , as well as in MY BOOKS and in other
articles and letters -- She always recommends we take her
statements as THEORIES -- as PROPOSITIONS. It is our job to prove
or disprove them.

I can understand why people object to having "H P B quotes"
hurled at them repeatedly. My only excuse is that she is so
provocative in some places that it actually makes one sit up and
think when we encounter a statement that is so very opposed to
our hitherto accepted ways of thinking. It is shocking, and that
can be very annoying. But does this do any good?

ALWAYS A PLEASURE

Best wishes,

Dal

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


Jerry S.