Theos-Talk Archives (June 2003 Message tt00161)

Hi Mauri. I am getting tired of hearing these kind of messages from you. See
below.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mauri" <mhart@idirect.ca>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 5:54 AM
Subject: Theos-World re Adelaisie's "theosophical studies"...


> Adelaisie wrote: <<Indeed I would say quite sincerely
> that there is no part of my life that is not informed by
> my theosophical studies. >>
>
> I tend to suspect that most humans might occasionally
> or often tend to be informed---ie, might "learn from," for
> "better or worse," from whatever perspective, by
> whatever they interpret as having whatever "b/Broader"
> meaning, whether they might "prefer" to call such
> informing "t/Theosophical studies," or whatever else, so

Wry: Once you put a principle, let's call it a "higher" principle into
practice, this calls for putting something conscious and active against
something mechanical and reactive, the personality. (Certain people have
developed a whole science of doing this. I would not say this science exists
in theosophy, as I have seen it, but there is no reason that it cannot.
Everything is always changing and new approaches are continually being
discovered that are more effective.) Of course both of these contradictory
configurations are within one body, but they are using some of the same
pathways, such as breath.. Because they cannot exist in the same space at
the same time. a war occurs, that results in the decrystalization of crude
reactive patterns which are based on false ideas about ones self-importance
and on feelings of insecurity, such as fear and greed. This is conscious
suffering. The method does not really matter. Of course, if one is serious,
one would like to have the most efficient method possible.
.
> ... But ("of course"?) if one's "Theosophical studies"...
> ie, in "more-specific," delineated, "exoteric/esoteric"
> cap T terms are seen as "specific enough" towards, say,
> "at least expanding one's worldview" (by whatever
> individualistic, interpretive route), then ... couldn't that
> kind of "essentially interpretive" processing be seen (in
> some cases, as per some "students of Theosophy," say?)
> as the karma/maya (that might be seen to be?) at the
> back of of such studies/informing (ie, while also seen as
> "informative")

Wry: Yes, it can be seen this way. In fact it is always this way.Though it
is not a moot point, it is pouring from the empty into the void to harp on
it. I am somewhat new to theosophy, but I will tell you right now, it is not
Zen Buddhism, not that the confusion you are spouting is either. All words
do not cut the grease, being that most words are the grease, including
yours, in my opinion. If there is just the right amount of grease, the motor
runs efficiently, but if there is too much grease, the motor clogs. And then
there is sand. We do not put sand in ther motor. In any case, the point you
have mentioned is worth noting (once or twice, not dozens of times.) It is
true that the lower self seeks "spiritual" ideas or whatever as a
preservation of its own pettiness and deceit and a movement away from facing
reality directly. This is why it is important to have a method that takes
this into account and will bring one to the crossroads, or the parting of
the red sea. How can the brain be used in such a way that the personality
cannot usurp it for its own devious purposes? I have suggested to you, on
more than one occasion, doing simple motor activities while having something
impartial, as if from outside, record the body. This is an ESOTERIC
exercise, if you want to call it that. If you are able to be in present
time without the personality taking over, you do not need to do it, but one
problem is that people imagine they are fully present when they are not.
This exercise is not for everyone. If you cannot see the sense of it, the
sheer intelligence, you will not do it. Some people cannot see it. Others
know immediately. I will tell you right now that very few people will do it,
though I hope as many as possible. If you do it, you will find out
eventually what being fully in the world is about.

>. ... so that, in effect, couldn't one's
> "Theosophic sense" (say?) of "broader reality" (by
> whatever karmic, interpretive, but
> "more-specific/relevant" route) tend to boil down to a
> sense that all karmic/mayavic "exoteric" learning, no
> matter how Theosophic or "i/Involved," is Mayavic

Wry: Yes. This is why it is important to have a direct practice that does
not involve interpretation. There are many good reasons why Madame Blavatsky
may not have presented such, if you look deeply at what she was doing from a
TIME-APPROPRIATE perspective. In fact, Morton is on to something, in my
opinion, in what he was suggesting in his message, "Conditioning and Other
Artificial Arts."

>(ie,
> "Mayavic" in a "transcendental," cap M sense...) in the
> sense that in it's exoteric/outward sense none of it "is"
> (ie, as per one's "intuitiveness") part of what is really
> happening, (or, say, "Really happening," if one prefers
> a cap R as an indication of an "intended reference" re
> esoteric/experiential "Reality," maybe ... ) ... ?

Wry: This is true, in my opinion, but if you understand this, then you need
to become a living bridge, or at least learn how to make bridges. The bridge
is always different. It depends on outward circumstances and ones aim. But
first it may be necessary to learn how to make one real bridge within
oneself. This is no easy matter. Esoteric is what helps you to actually
accomplish this, not talking about ideas or about physical reality. Esoteric
is about actually making this bridge within onself. There are methods. The
"intuition" alone will not lead you to this. It is an error to think in this
way. I am prepared to go into this is great detail if you are interested.
One thing I will say for you: though you are a pest, you have at least
stuck to your question, which is very favorable. This is one quality that is
in your favor. This is the same Mauri went on his roof in the cold with wet
blankets or whatever and did the experiment with the yoga of the psychic
heat, but one quality is not enough. If you bear in mind that all odds are
against you to succeed and never forget this, while at the same time
combining cleverness with fortitude and a specific method that cuts the
grease in yourself, you may have a chance of discovering something very
important you do not yet know about. I do not usually speak of books, but I
suggest to you and others, "The Conference of the Birds" by Attar, a most
amazing piece of allegorical material. Sincerely, Wry
>
> Speculatively,
> Mauri
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>