Theos-Talk Archives (June 2002 Message tt00038)

June 7 2002

Dear Bill and Friends:


Good thought.

I'm sure that Nature came up with that a good long time ago.

The idea was, as I grasp it: The ABSOLUTE SPIRITUAL ONE wanted to
know itself and therefore needed a "mirror."

It agreed at that most remote period to divide itself into who
sections

1. SPIRIT or PERFECTION; and

2. A "material" ( or substantial but temporary 'form') whereon to
try to see its own reflection.

That primordial matter/substance was almost but not quite SPIRIT --
As experience accumulated it served as a "memory" to record it, and
that memory became known as WISDOM or ( Buddhi). However the
interaction between PERFECTION and "almost Perfection (Buddhi)
required an intermediary that could see and understand both.

UNIVERSAL MIND (or Mahat) was born -- able to see past, present and
future, and able to assume either a supreme idealism or involve itself
in the grossest limits of form.

Mankind represents now (as I grasp the concept) the median aspect of
"Mind." It can like the God Janus, look both ways: past and future,
while living in the present. It has to be free to enable choice to be
free. It can look at ideals and it can look at the selfishness of
isolation and self-interest.

This dichotomy forced the birth of Kama-deva. The "god" of pure
desire of universal love and charity and mercy for all. This
universal concern may be translated "Brotherhood." An excess ( loss
of balance) of love brings on tyranny. A lack of brotherhood brings
on the mismanagement of procrastination and inertia. Thus in
opposition to ideals and "virtues" there came "vice" upon the scene.

Does this not describe our situation?


The Thinking instrument -- Mind -- needs contrast and a foundations of
constancy in order to establish a platform. This platform (where we
are in the here and now) includes memory, new thought, and
anticipation. Anticipation is valuable to preview potential benefits
or losses which may accrue to us depending on whether we are able to
so some judicious choosing.

The main problem is : Are we independent? Are we partially
independent? are we interactive with others and are there any limits
to this interaction situation ? Further do we actually share in the
regulation and the laws of the universe?

Have we been able to establish some idea of what those Laws might be ?

If there are some ( as in mathematics, chemistry,. physics
astro-physics, mechanics, etc... then why should the life and
interaction of the human family be devoid of law?

Curious if true.

Any ideas ?

Dal


Dallas

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill M
Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 8:17 AM
To:
Subject: guruic thoughts

My brother and I were playing golf again this morning. Together we
would
make one good golfer.

Today I re-read the recent exchanges between Dallas and Jerry.
Together they would make one good guru.

Thanks,
Bill