Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00257)

July 30 2002

Dear Bill:

As sure as I am of the value of Theosophy, I am also sure
that the whole of Nature is actually DEITY ( not a
"Personal" God, nor a "Personal Creator" ) but the whole of
the Universe is a living entity and is in fact CONSCIOUSNESS
(or SPIRIT) -- Intelligence (Soul - Mind) is the
embodiment of an aspect of that ONE CONSCIOUSNESS and
therefore all things and beings, including Man (minds that
are self-conscious) are related -- brothers of one degree or
another.

Does this sound strange ? It is of course my way of
expressing it.

What I am trying to say is that at the core of our being we
have embodied in us an aspect of GOD -- the OMNIPRESENT. No
portion of the universe is without IT.

Also included are the other deific aspects: Omniscience and
Omnipotence.

Omniscience implies that Laws operate everywhere, and are
impartially administered by DEITY /Nature. Nothing is ever
"hidden." Expressed another way: "God knows all."

Omnipotence means, impersonally administered, justice. We
get exactly what we put into Nature which may be a plus or a
minus. The difference (simply put) is between generosity
and selfishness. Between Brotherhood and isolation -- we
are all ."isolated" fragments of the Divine. The divinity
is in the Mind and the awareness of the "general Good." We
can never completely escape from this enclosure -- which is
the universe and extends everywhere, from the "very small"
to the "very large."

Cycles of evolution include waves of progress and
retrogression. These are caused by the generalized choices
of mankind. We know of them as cycles in history.
Apparently there are times when a preponderance of Egos of a
particular character incarnate together. Our present age is
one of those where there is a vast Technological
development, but very little moral or ethical concomitant to
support and spiritualize it. Hence we have wars and
horrors, as selfish men at the head of states, seek to
dominate, and really care little (privately) for the number
of victims they create.

If theosophy is correct and reincarnation of the Spirit /
Soul is a fact,. then we, as individual consciousnesses were
the members of earlier civilizations. Acting, thinking and
choosing then, we have in fact, created (as a mass) the
situation we call "civilization" to day.

We may characterize it as highly mechanical, and we have
developed the ability to probe and deal with many aspects of
the gross material substance of the Earth (and our bodies)
as we presently know them. But the one question no one every
fully answers is: "After you have accumulated money, power
and ease, and come to the end of your life, what next ?
Then again the vast shadow of mystery looms: what happens
when this body dies and we are left naked without money,
power, friends, servants, family ? Are we to be flayed or
favored? (It is at this point that priesthood steps in with
claims that are never verified.)

We have not yet been able to penetrate very far into the
causes of things. We use materials but we have no idea how
Nature ( EMBODIED DEITY) formed them and causes them to
interact.

We know that heat, cold, variations in pressure, alter
"states of matter" -- from solid to liquid to gas to
ethereal (?) Analysis of their composition enables us to
determine their atomic and molecular structure, and how each
"element" differs from others and thus the mysteries of
chemistry an physics become more commonly exposed as has not
been for thousands of years. But even if generally taught
not many of those so instructed actually carry the knowledge
beyond a few years, or apply it in daily life. The language
of Science (or Medicine) soon becomes a mystery to most.

But outside of these descriptive measurements, and the
numbers we assign to each as characteristic of their
composition, we know very little about the great powers of
electricity and magnetism in that are which we would
characterize as "the very small." Equally mysterious are
the laws that govern celestial movements, (the very large)
and the attractions (and repulsions) that form planetary
systems, and galaxies. So we "leave such things to the
experts." And a new kind of priesthood is born -- academic
authority.

As humans -- as THINKERS -- endowed with Minds -- we are
somewhere between these two extremes of the "very small" and
the "very large." Our minds may or may not be able to
accept (usually reject) such extremes. Yet all of us have
the capacity to learn to understand and to Master any
science or philosophy if we will only will to do so. Where
does the WILL come from? who makes it work ? Who directs
the Mind? Who chooses the desires and emotions to express
them ?
What and where is the REAL MAN within each of us ? Is it
not that mysterious but ever-present fragment of DEITY of
the universal GOD ? How do we embodied Minds get to know
more of it ? How do we permit it to manifest through our
lives and actions?

Yet, We are not yet curious enough to ask: How did this all
come about? Where were the rules of Nature in regard to
Matter evolved? When did evolution (manifestation) begin?
When will it end? What is its purpose? Why have we such
great powers latent in us? Can we develop them?

Our Sciences are content to analyse and describe differences
of state, valence, and properties we denote as "physical,"
or "chemical." the WHY remains so far in most cases a
closed book.

We therefore, in confusion, exclaim : "there must be a
Creator." And the corollary is: " We are creatures subject
to the will of this mythical Something." Because we do not
have an easy answer are we to eternally grovel ?

Theosophy with its seven-fold division of Nature provides a
scale on which everything can be seen to exist and
inter-relate. Is this true? Are we not seeing to discover
this one important fact?

Lets look at one fact: We are here and we can ask Nature,
Deity, God Why are we here? What are our duties?

You write of the dilemma of ethical and moral conditions.
Are those defined? Why do they appear mysterious. How are
we to secure answers to such vital questions?

You write of Christianity, yet as I see it we are afraid to
apply the disciplines Jesus taught to ourselves? In fact
most people give lip service to what they call a "belief" --
(something they cannot express yet ) and in life they do as
they please . This produces a hypocritical situation to
profess one thing with the "crowd" and then to hide our own
actions from them because we have a sneaking suspicion that
those are unacceptable in the glare of public vision.

Why is this, unless we have interiorly the Christ-principle
that tells the mind and the desires what is RIGHT TO DO.
How can we discover this? The churches conceal this wisdom
and speak of means to pacify a wrathful God, or to attain
salvation by confession and conversion. They do not say:
You have to find out those who you have sinned against, tell
them, and offer to redress the wrongs done. Why is that?
Is it universally fair to allow victims to continue
suffering? Are we cowards ?

Suppose that we consider a short-cut: Let's say that the
World and the Universe (which runs under laws all the time)
includes what we humans call the ethical or the moral aspect
of personal life?

"Right and Wrong" can be seen (if one travels widely) to be
a common denominator that lubricates inter-human dealings in
al places. Lets say that the laws of decency, brotherhood,
honesty, sincerity, charity, compassion -- all of those
things we call "virtues" and seem to be unable to define.

Lets also say that EVIL are all actions (that follow our
personal thinking) that isolate us from other, create
selfishness, and actually harm others in private or in
public and which we know make victims of others -- those
things which in every country and religion are called the
"vices."

There is in us a kind of "weather-vane." It is called the
moral sense. It is found equal in all. It is fairness,
justice, assistance in time of need, and above all
generosity and service. Righteousness is a general term for
this. Most people shy away from such a designation. Why ?
Was not Jesus the teacher of righteousness? Were not the
great prophets, and ancient teachers of mankind also
teachers of virtue?

Why is it that religions grow up after their teachings are
made public?

Who and what are "priests ?" What do the claim t do that
we cannot ?

Is the perversion of the original teachings and the overlay
of rites and ceremonies, confession and the remission of
sin, a part of the paraphernalia of concealment that
outrages the common sense of decency that is innate in every
human ?

The whole emphasis is on concealment of our errors and
sins -- not their redressing, or of making restitution to
the victims. Oh no. That would expose us to public censure
and derogation. And of that, we in our pride and arrogance
fear the most.

Theosophy, as I understand it says we have to do "violence"
to our fears and ignorance. If we become wise we do as the
Buddha said" Cease from evil. Do good.. That is the path
to freedom and to perfection."

Are you too impatient? I say no. But as a substitute for
exposing a problem let work on the solution. Such solutions
begins in the depth of our personal consciousness. it is
there that the courage of conviction in universal justice
must begin to curb the exuberance of desire --which, if we
were to carry it to its logical conclusion would show it to
be dangerous and dire for us.

Theosophy calls it the ancient doctrine of Karma. Nature
administers it. Our action is to prevent ourselves from
vicious action. To do that we deliberately cease from
thinking evil.

Se if that works

Best wishes,

Dal

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




-----Original Message-----
From: Willgram
Sent:	Sunday, July 28, 2002 12:54 PM
To:
Subject:	UNIVERSALITY: Swastika Symbol


Dear Larry, Dallas & other friends that may have read my
essay at:
http://www.lifeafterlife.org

I want to argue the point that all who call themselves
Theosophists and who
regularly join this net should have a goal of wanting to
learn more so they can do
something to cause the Creator's process of evolution to
move upward on a positive cycle
as it swings in that direction coming off of a negative
cycle for at least the last 500 years.

I think that maybe the most important things I say is in my
essay at the tail
end of the section "NOW LET US DISCUSS HOW THE PROCESS OF
EVOLUTION WORKS".

I quote, "Cyclic changes are now proceeding as year after
year the souls of
prior civilizations are being incarnated in this period when
liberty of
thought and action are not so restricted in the West as they
have been in the past dogmatic
religious prejudice and bigotry. At the present time, we
are in a cycle of
transition, when, as a transition period shold indicate ,
everything in
philosophy, religion, and. society is changing."

Are those words not talking directly to you and I today?
Don't we have to
understand where we are in the cycle of religious belief if
we are to use the
knowledge we are learning from Theosophy to make a
contribution to the
positive movement of the process of evolution? Should that
not always be the
goal we seeking? And does it not apply to each of us,
regardless how much
we know about the details of Theosophy?

There are today, hundreds of recent books on the market that
are matching up
recent scientific research with the history of Christian
dogma, every one of
which weakens the degree of belief that we accept Christian
teaching. If that
is true, does it not also weaken the willingness that we
have to support the
desire of the Creator to move us in the direction of loving
each other all
around the world? Can't we see all around the world, that
that goal is not
our highest priority?

So, wouldn't it help if we looked around a little more,
instead of just
growing in our knowledge, we talked more about moving the
Process of
Evolution to bottom out and get moving in its upward curve?
Hasn't Theosophy
told us about cycles? And wouldn't it be nice if we tried a
little harder to
get Christians back on the original Eastern beliefs of
Reincarnation and
Karma? Wouldn't that get humanity's wheels back on the
right track?

That is really what I think my essay is all about. However,
216 times one or
more people have read that essay since it was announced on
this net, but so
far I do not recognize that the seeds have started to
show any signs of
growth.

Am I too impatient? Am I wrong or right?

Bill Quinn