Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00286)

>From whatever school in India the nihilist view of the impermanence of the 
higher SELF and the invalidity of mantric, mandalic and mudric practices 
(that require proper visualization in the mind and centering of the four 
lower natures to fulfill their purposes), as well as the discussion related 
to the three gunas -- came from... It appers to be a much distorted 
misinterpretation of the true (fundamentally scientific) "Secret Doctrine."  

Rather than argue against it point for point (which is already well done in 
the SD) -- the following is the actual bases of both the origin of Atma 
(representing the higher SELF of all) as well as the absolute (fundamentally 
triune) Universal source of ALL (Brahma, Parabrahm or Para-Parabrahm), and 
it's (their) unified interrelationship to the three gunas.  

NOTE: What follows below is partly a repeat of a previous discussion 
referring to Atma -- with some added commentary related to the gunas -- that 
will enable discerning and intuitive students (with reference to the tea
chings in the Secret Doctrine) to arrive at their own understanding of the 
relationship of the SELF to the gunas, as well as determine the validity of 
the meditative means (as described in the Voice of the Silence and the Yoga 
Aphorisms of Patanjali) required to reach "Self realization" or 
"enlightenment" 

(Note that; to become ONE with and fully conscious of the higher SELF or the 
individual monad [atma, buddhi, higher manas] which is in an eternal state of 
Sattva, one must achieve Sattva on each of the four lower levels of one's 
being -- leaving aside the false, nihilistic view that one's individual being 
doesn't exist as such, except as an illusion.:-):

"In my view (which, apparently, coincides with the theosophical view): what 
Buddha meant by "anatman" as "maya," or illusion, was that each individual 
Atman or "ray" of Atma is essentially of the same essence as the Supreme 
Spirit from which it emanates (therefore not "separate" in "essential being" 
from all other rays)... But, like individual rays of the sun, which are no 
different from each other in essence and travel on "forever"** in their 
individual (different) directions and activities (karma) -- each of these 
individual rays of Atma, as unchanging higher EGOS or individual SELVES, also 
continue on their separate karmic paths -- and, consequently, through 
ignorance of their identical source, they each become deluded into assuming 
that the surrounding fields of lower nature (individual selves or lower egos 
identified with the mind and body) which they carry along with them, are the 
essential (unchanging) reality of their being. This false belief is what 
Buddha tried to dispel with his doctrine of anatma. (It is interesting that 
if this was not his purpose, there would be no sense to the teachings of the 
bodhisattva path and the transcendence of karma, or the doctrine of the 
skandas.)

"** "forever" meaning the entire loop that an emanating atmic ray travels 
through the cycle of "wakeful" manvantaric existence in Brahma and its return 
to "sleeping" pralayic existence in Parabrahm -- to begin the journey again 
in the following manvantara (and repeatedly through following cycles of 
Brahma) based on its individual skandas until all its karma is resolved or 
mitigated and brought into harmonious relationship with the huigher SELF of 
ALL. 

"Of, course, this doesn't deny the possibility that once any individual atmic 
entity (or Atman) resolves all its karma, whether through meditative 
realization or otherwise, and becomes absorbed in Parabrahm (or becomes ONE 
with the source in nirvana or paranishpanna) -- that is can ever be 
distinguished as the same separate individual being on the next emanation of 
Brahma -- unless, as a bodhisattva adept (such as a Buddha), it so chooses" 
-- and can, accordingly, "remember all its past 'lives'."  

Thus, Atma, per se, whether noumenal in Pralaya or phenomenal in manvantara 
-- (putting aside its essential manifest monadic conjunction with Buddhi and 
higher Manas) -- can be considered, in effect, eternal... Since it is, initi
ally as Mahatma, the first emanation of Parabrahm as well as correspondingly 
and analogously being the first emanation of Brahma. When unmanifest or 
absorbed in Brahma or Parabrahm, it does not become nonexistent, but is 
simply a "sleeping" (existent) potentiality out of Time (infinite duration) 
rather than an existent reality in Time (limited duration) ... Although, in 
itself, it is continually unchanging and therefore, timeless. This might be 
likened to a particular molecule of water that doesn't lose its specific 
individuality even though absorbed in the body of the ocean. It also 
corresponds to Jesus' statement that, as the Christ (direct ray of Atma), he 
is "in the world but not of the world" -- therefore, not subject to time. 
(That which is not subject to time is, in effect, eternal.)  

It also implies that Parabrahm, along with the "consciousness" inherent in 
its static zero-point center of eternal abstract motion, or "spinergy," 
pervades all phenomnal beings, from the simplest "atom" (sub sub quark), 
through the four kingdoms of nature up to the most complex "organism" (Man, 
made in the "image of Brahma)." This is in line with the idea of all 
religions, that the highest "God" (Parabrahm, Ein Soph, Allah, Christos, Ali 
Buddha, etc. is within us all and only needs to be acknowledged by a profound 
realization of the Self. Thus, "the self of one is the Self of all" -- and 
the All includes both the Absolute AND the Relative -- one being the opposite 
aspect of the other... As the "zero point" is the essence of non motion, 
inertia or Tamas, and its surrounding spinergy is the essence of motion, 
action, or Rajas -- with harmony or Sattva being simply the balance between 
these two opposites (e.g., body still, mind in motion; mind still, spirit in 
motion; spirit still, Absolute [God] in motion). 

Note that motion, as "action" or karma, whuch never ceases, has three 
aspects; (1) non motion or Tamas; (2) abstract motion or Sattva; and (3) 
concrete motion or Rajas. This relates to: (1) the Zero Point (as tamas) ; (
2) its surrounding unmanifest, nonlinear, non-dimensional Spinergy, balanced 
by two directions of spin with equal and opposite forces (as Sattva); and (3) 
the multidimensional coadunate fields of linear motional energy after 
emanation or manifestation (as Rajas). Thus, ALL existence, whether manifest 
or unmanifest, abstract or concrete, is inherently triune in essence. And, 
this trinity, expresses itself in all further differentiations of the 
fundamental unity, e.g., the object of preception, the perception itself, and 
the perceiver; the beginning, the middle, and the end; the spirit, the soul, 
and the body, etc.

To be better able to visualize the origin of all the analogous energetic and 
numerical relationships between all these different aspects of universal 
involution and evolution, and for reference to the emanation of the 
interdependent fields of consciousness from the initial zero point of eternal 
abstract Space and its surrounding motional energy (or "spinergy"), as well 
as to understand the dynamic (coenergetic) relationship between such 
"coadunate but not consubstantial" fields, see:

http://tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/evolution2.html

Note: It is essential that, in order to create a complete circular or 
spherical entity starting with the emanation out of the primal zero-point of 
the first ray of manifestation, the ray must complete its first repetitive 
path in three cycles -- forming a figure 8 within a surrounding circle -- 
which eventually spirally revolves into two inner spheres within an outer 
sphere. These three elements (circles or spheres), as an interconnected 
unity, constitute the root nature of all succeeding triune monads consisting 
of differentiation's analogous to Atma, Buddhi, Manas. (e.g., Brahma, Vishnu, 
Shiva; Kether, Binah, Chochma; Mulaprakriti, Perusha, Prakriti, etc.)

As an added note;  
One reason why many theosophists (who study the SD) cannot see the forest for 
the trees and misinterpret the true esoteric teachings (based solely on the 
fundamental principles), is that they get sidetracked by going too deeply 
into the more or less confirmatory references to exoteric religious teachings 
of the Buddhists, Brahmins and Hebrews, that even among their own sects are 
often contradictory -- as well as referring to the primitive science and 
speculative philosophies of the I9th century that Blavatsky was limited to at 
the time. **  

Another, is that HPB was forced to hint around the bush rather than directly 
explain the overall metaphysical scientific truths -- in accord with her vows 
as an initiated adept, which required that some key teachings be withheld, 
split and scattered out of context, or vaguely inferred -- so that only those 
of greater developed intuition and more integrated memory and thought 
processes would be able to grasp them in their entirety, and, in the process, 
realize the inherent cyclic triplicity of and between zero, infinity, and the 
entities (between them) that govern all causes and effects in the universe.  

**Incidentally, if HPB was to write the SD today with reference to modern and 
post modern scientific theories of relativity, quanta, superstrings, 
membranes, holography, chaos, simplicity, complexity, etc., (some of which 
still are not consistent with each other) there would be much less room for 
misinterpretation of the basic laws that govern karma, reincarnation, and 
other theosophical truths that thoroughly and consistently integrates zero, 
infinity, and all that lies between.  

LHM

In a message dated 01/19/02 12:13:40 PM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes:

>Jerry: "Dallas has the notion that by establishing his "self" as an 
>outsider observer of a duality, by creating a third or triad, he has 
>somehow solved the whole duality problem. He fails to realize that he 
>is simply creating yet another duality - an observer looking at an 
>observed duality, so that the basic duality of a self looking at a 
>not-self remains. Setting up a new duality does nothing to transcend 
>dualities but only perpetuates the situation."
>
>Brigitte: This is what I learned during a meditation teaching in 
>India last time I was there and is from an article I am preparing 
>for my second web page on this and related subjects.
>
>I appreciate any comments also from the rest of the group:
>
>Where does misunderstanding occur in relation to the concept of the 
>Gunas? lt is the attempt to change a force, , "as if" one aspect 
>(Sattva) of the one substance is better than another aspect of the 
>one substance (Tamas).
>This ,"spiritual" confusion leads seekers into trying hard to change 
>and control their actions and personalities and presentations-in 
>short, the ,"1," which they are not. Moreover, it adds the judgment 
>that sattvic behavior is better than rajasic behavior ,"as if" either 
>one is more than a concept and has something to do with who you are. 
>This belief that somehow magically, by an "1" becoming more of one 
>(sattvic) and less of another (tamasic) or, if they are balanched 
>in some way, ,"realization" is assured is an illusion. lt is this 
>focus on the outer manifestation or "1" representation that forces 
>the ,,seeker" to lose sight of the underlying substance the Gunas are 
>made of. Simply put, it is like trying to change a reflection in a 
>mirror rather than notice the 1 am that is boking into the mirror is 
>prior to its reflection.
>
>There is only one substance , and believing in the concept of Guna 
>theory and not seeing it also, as a veiled trap, forces the seeker 
>into trying to change "himself" or 3 ,"self" that is not. Believing 
>in improving or changing yourseif is a red flag of this ,,spiritual" 
>veil that you are believing you are and it is, which leads to this 
>seductive metaphysical trap: "If 1 do this or that, all will be okay, 
>and 1 will become enlightened."
>
>Moreover, the ,"movement" of the Gunas is a process. One Guna turns 
>into another Guna, which turns into another Guna. lt is not static, 
>but a dynamic process, a movement, which you are not.
>For this reason, in the enquiry ,"we" have done, not only does one 
>Guna turn into another, we see that actually contained within Sattva 
>is Raja, and contained within Raja is Sattva and Tamas. Stated 
>another way, a seed contains within itself not only its sprouting 
>into a tree, but its growth, its bearing fruit, its leaves turning 
>brown, and ultimately its death. So too, each of Us began as a seed 
>and so, everything we are in terms 
>of ,"good," ,"bad," ,"pretty," ,"ugly,"etc., was in that seed.There
>are some who say we can choose to be ,"good" or ,"bad," ,"sattvic" 
>or ,"raj asic." But, you did not choose to be a man or woman, or 
>choose your height or hair color, it was all contained within the seed 
>and just happened. So, too, Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas are all contained 
>within each other. lt is only an ,,1" that has taken on a "spiritual" 
>philosophy that believes one should be more sattvic than raj asic. 
>All is contained within the seed of consciousness.
>
>This can be likened to meeting someone and feeling the incredible 
>seed of love. However, as in all relationships, the love turns into 
>hate, which turns into withdrawal, which turns into like, which turns 
>into affection, which turns into love. The possibilities are endless 
>because contained within love is the seed of hate, and contained 
>within Sattva are Tamas and Rajas.
>
>The veil in spiritual and psychological work arises because of the 
>following:
>
>1) Compartmentalization: Love is good, hate is bad, Sattva is good, 
>Tamas is bad;
>
>2) Once this compartmentalized veil arises, one is sought over the 
>other and is not seen as contained within each other; and 3) You 
>begin to believe you are when you are not.
>
>Tarnas is one of the three forces. Tamas represents the concept of 
>inertia. The enquiry below demonstrates how contained witbin the seed 
>of Tamas are Sattva and Rajas.
>
>Once the abstracting continues beyond the object level, 1 am, the 
>verbal I am arises. From the verbal I am arises an infinite number of 
>possible inferences. lt is, therefore, dear that the concept of sound 
>and the concepts and inferences, which arise out of the concept of so 
>und, are abstractions of the nervous System that originate from the 
>concept of sound. The concept of sound as mantra cannot 
>liberate ,,one" from the effects of the concept of sound or its 
>inferences. Why? Because if there were no nervous System, there wo 
>uld be no sound. Sound is a concept, as is mantra, which is 
>constructed by a nervous system and interpreted by an "i" which is 
>a byproduct of the nervous system. This addresses the famous 
>question: ,,If a tree falls in the forest and no one is aro und to 
>hear it, does it make a sound?" No, and once this is "understood," 
>then "we" can ,,see" that an "1" repeats the concept or symbol of 
>mantra in hopes of getting something-but it is still an ,,1" (which 
>is consciousness) rep eating a sound (which is consciousness) in hop 
>es of getting something in the fantasized future (which is still 
>consciousness).
>
>This indudes mantra, which is a condensed and symbolic representation 
>of the concept of sound, Moreover, the Siva Sutras state that all 
>bondage is caused by sound. Why? Because sound creates letters, 
>letters create words, words create ideas and concepts. Hence, since 
>the repeater of the mantra and the mantra are both abstractions of 
>the concept of sound, how can one abstraction (mantra) liberate 
>another abstraction ("1") that repeats the mantra?
>
>Mantras, often times, are used as talismans of protection and are 
>often referred to as sacred sounds. Many people incorrectly think or 
>imagine that the purpose ofmantras, called the divine sounds, is to 
>focus the mmd and relax the body, which is supposed to lead 
>to ,"realization."
>
>CONTEMPLATION: HOW COULD RELAXATION OR FOCUSING THE MIND, WHICH 
>REQUIRES AN ,,1" TO FOCUS OR A FOCUSER, HAVE ANYTHING
>TO DO WITH FINDING OUT WHO YOU ARE, OR 1 AM THAT-YOU ARE NOT; WHEN 
>AN "1".
>
> The Karma-Kanda, the portion of the Vedas that deals with practice, 
>discusses the performance of sacrifices, rites, and charms. To 
>support their execution, cult images, yantras and mandalas 
>constructed of geometric shapes, were later developed. In the 
>meditation practices ofTantra (e.g., in Kundalini-Yoga), these play 
>an important role as ,,supports"; they are modeis 
>for ,,visualizations," whereby the mediator inwardly pictures various 
>aspects and powers of the divine. The concept of a yantra as a light 
>pattern, is similar to Om as the primal sound, it is suggested that 
>Shri-Yantyra is the primal light form (first abstraction or 
>condensation from the concept of light). You could say that the light 
>pa!tern precedes the actual deity. For example, if you could focus 
>attention on the condensed light as a pattern (Yantra) called Kali, 
>you could see that the condensed, abstracted light pattern (Yantra) 
>is more solid than emptiness, and less solid than the deity Kali.
>The concept of a light pattern (Yantra) symbolically representing a 
>diety like Kali is a more subtle or less condensed form of the 
>physical form of Kali herseif. Theoretically, the more subtle the 
>representation, the ,,doser" to the substance. lt is through Focus 
>ofAttention and being it, which is worship, that this process is 
>supposed to be done, with the understan ding that this worshipper, as 
>well as the worshipped (Yantra, deity), in this case Kali, are one.
>However, like Mantras, Yantras should be done knowing that the Yantra 
>deity is made of the same substance as the viewer of the Yantra.
>Problems arise because, an "1" believes it is doing the focusing or 
>concentrating and that the «1" is separate from its object. The
>"I" mediator then imbues the symbolic representation of the coiicept 
>of liglit or Yantra or object or picture with magical powers to save, 
>transform, give, protect, redeem, grant grace, liberate, etc.
>Yantra worship is a preliminary practice, which leads (hopefully) to 
>Samadhi (with seeds). However, the Veil of consciousness is tuat 
>the ,,1" imagines it is doing something, will get sorneth ing, and 
>that it is made of a different substance than the Yantra, which will 
>bestow some form of «enlight enment" Moreover, it must be
>understood that the concept of light and its condensed-abstracted 
>symbolic representation called Yantra as solidified light is still part of 
the 
>mi-rage. In other words, meditating on a Mantra, its meaning, or to 
>develop a ,,spiritual"quality still presupposes and represents 
>an ,,1', in the mirage. The Yantra is a symbol, which exists only 
>through the nervous system, and hence, prior to it is not. Moreover, 
>the symbol has no connection to the symbolized.
>
>An archetype is intermittently made of light, and ultimately is only 
>nothing. The concept of light can not be without an I am, which is a 
>by-product of a nervous system that ,,says" ,,this is light"; hence, 
>no 1 am concept, no light or Yantra concept-and No-You.
>
>THERE IS AN ON-GOUNG ILLUSION THAT SOMEHOW THIS "YOU" OR OR EVEN AN
>ENLIGHTENED "YOU" WILL EXIST, COULD EXIST AND WILL CONTINUE TO EXIST.
>
>Brigitte