Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00028)

March 5 2004

Re Comment? -- What is the purpose for our Universe and
ourselves?

Dear Z:

This is not easy and involves some philosophizing. See if this
makes
sense to you.

Karma to me, is a word used to indicate the harmony of the
universe in
its living Self. It springs from an untold past, exists now,
and ever
posses forward into an unforeseeable future. Unforeseeable?
Because
fresh choices, mine and others determine that course.

I am, in my esteem, (as an essentially spiritual being) only
spending a
"day" in this succession of many life-times of renewed
experiences, and
have vital links, in terms of memory and capacity, to talents
developed
in my past lives.

I do not recall them in detail, (some speak of these experiences
and
have offered proofs; NDE experiences also offer a quantum of
'proof')
as the material assembled for this present brain was then absent
in its
present conformity, but the talents or their lack in my present
personality gives me evidence of their having been developed. I
see in
myself a bifurcation of consciousness. One is stable and seems
permanent -- the sense of SELF. And the other -- a varying
quantity,
concerned chiefly with the experiences of this life-time. So, in
any
discussion, these two ought to be figured as present.

Let us first look around us at our law, and our world full of
regulations for fairness in communal living -- regardless of
politics,
personal opinions, or religions. What seem to be general
principles? I
will try an show how KARMA seems to me to be in operation, and
the
impact of our present thinking about it has on ourselves, and on
others.


Would not a correlation (and comparison) of constitutions and
enacted
Laws, taken from the major countries of the world show that what
we
call vaguely "virtue" seem to be the common basis for all laws?

Fairness, sincerity, honesty, diligence, concern, mercy,
compassion,
brotherhood, charity, love, friendliness, regard for individual
integrity, the fair right to hold and use property, etc... are
all
involved in this panorama of communal living.

Further, no political, personal, or religious dogmas, regulations
or
rules that lead to separatism and selfishness, or to special
assumed
response or regard by a "God," or a "Supreme Power," may be
permitted or
considered as mitigating the reason for any unfair treatment
meted to
anyone.

I recall that the UN many years ago passed a general statement on
human
rights. It included such ideas and excluded religious biases.

Theosophy (as I understand it) adds that those "rights" include
responsibilities. Those are for the whole of our world and,
also,
every one of the many entities that constitute its universal
environment. We share atoms, molecules, forces and powers with
the
whole of Nature. Our responsibilities become logically apparent
when we
dwell on the idea of having a continued share in past, present
and the
future of all, including ourselves.

It is NATURE as a whole (Is this the basis for the concept of
"God?")
that supports and gives us "life." Because we are "small," and
one
among quintillions in our own minds, does not mean we are either
unessential or powerless.

Why should we permit ourselves to consider others to be
unimportant and
not due their rights (even if the seem "wrong" to us). The fact
is that
(if there is a "God") if a universal being exists, human or
otherwise,
there is a LAW in the UNIVERSE that supports its being there.
Correct?
Everything, without exception, lives under some law or laws.
Everything
has a relation, however remote with all others, and no one is
entitled
to say that this is unnecessary, irrelevant, frivolous or may be
terminated. And, as far as I am able to see, we have no right to
make
"final" decisions about its continued "living." We just don't
have the
broad range of knowledge needed to be entirely fair and just. Do
we? Oh,
yes, sometimes, we condemn others on the basis of expediency and
impatience, and arrogate to ourselves the right to "act as God
would
direct us!" But on review, impartially, we usually find there is
a flaw
of reasoning there.

There remains the cases of perversion and absolute EVIL. I mean
deliberate transgression against the Laws of fairness, equality,
compassion, and equable responsibility. This is characterized by
intense selfishness, harming and torturing others, and a
carelessness
for those others' needs and living. There is this in evidence,
when
actions and arguments are advanced characterized by making the
weak, the
indefensible, and the poor -- victims of such misused power.
Finally, is
a wicked person a sick person? Are there illnesses of mind and
psyche
that reprehensible as they are to the sane and balanced person,
may be
cured? If so, how?

My answer is that such individuals ought to be "restrained." I
cannot
support, in all fairness, "capital punishment." Mankind and we,
as
individuals, do not have either knowledge, right or power to
decide for
others how to live, but if their lives encroach unfairly on
others, then
they ought to be restrained. I do not mean punishment, since
there
again, we would find it most difficult to adequately understand
the
motives of such persons. But it is evident that they ought to be
prevented from inflicting further pain on their fellows or anyone
or
anything else.

Speaking further to this point, I would say if we delve in our
own
memories we will find examples of such conflicts arising --
either as
to our own past thoughts, emotions, motives, and decisions -- or
as
observations of the words and actions of others around us.

It may be considered difficult and tasteless to discuss "morals,"
and
"ethics."
But nevertheless, those, and the question of universal criteria
for vice
and virtue, are the common base for all our, and everyone else's
decisions. In fact, one might say that our lives are focussed on
developing in ourselves a most sensitive moral sense, so that we
cannot
do "wrong" to anyone.

I have widely travelled during my life to many countries, and
wherever I
went I was not thoroughly cognizant of the local statues and
laws. But
with good will to all and with the firm conviction that if I
behaved in
a fair and honest way, others would respond likewise, I have
always been
treated well.

I am convinced through practical experience, that there is a
universal
unwritten LAW that rules the whole of nature fairly. Mankind is
only a
powerful portion of this whole. As such, one of our present
"lessons"
is to behave likewise and voluntarily. The focus is on being a
"volunteer." How can we decide to "join society" even when
"no-one" is
looking? (But is it entirely true that our secret thoughts and
acts
remain forever unknown and invisible? Isn't it curious that many
religions seek to reassure miscreants that their God will pardon
them,
and grant them the 'future' (but unprovable) pleasures of
"heaven"
providing they "repent" and rejoin the "faith?" Don't you think
such
claims ought to be logically examined? )

If THEOSOPHY is correct, we are all "immortal Pilgrims" on a long
way
towards "Supreme Perfection." We reincarnate as
"spiritual-mind-souls."
And our Universe and world are examples of a dynamic harmony
achieved so
that the processes of living are made impartial and appropriate
to all.

In effect, "God," or "DEITY" is claimed to be universal, and is
equally
present in us -- as in everything else -- from the sub-atom to
the
outermost galaxy, with equal opportunities for increment of
intelligence, and the development of individual, independent
self-consciousness.

What lacks? An understanding in full of this scheme of actual
life, and
the purpose of all living. Every religion claims the universality
of
their "God." If so, then GOD as a basis, being UNIVERSAL is
identical,
and only each religion uses different names for the same BEING.
It is
the priesthoods of the various sects that have developed the
"differences," instead of emphasizing the similarities.
THEOSOPHY, per
contra, emphasizes similarities and encourages each individual to
think
these things out for themselves. As far as I am able to think,
there are
three things that cannot be eliminated from consideration:

1.	I exist as SELF (SPIRITUAL IMPERISHABLE EGO) and, I think.

2.	The Universe around me exists in all its disparity and
harmony.
LAW appears to me to operate in all its relationships great or
small,
slow or fast, moral or immoral.

3.	There is a regular and lawful relationship existing between
myself and my surrounding world and universe.

See if this is of help.

Best wishes,



Dallas

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Zakk D
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 12:53 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Request for comments
=====================================

Dallas,

Thank you for the material. It would appear that karma would be
better
understood, not by a definition, but by a description.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: <study@blavatsky.net>
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 1:16 PM
Subject: [bn-study] Re: Request for comments



March 1 2004

RE: [bn-study] Re: Request for comments KARMA Aphorisms on --



Here is the text of APHORISMS ON KARMA

They state very clearly the basis on which our Universe and world
operate -- where the moral value of intention has a preeminent
power.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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



APHORISMS ON KARMA


(1) There is no Karma unless there is a being to make it or feel
its
effects.

(2) Karma is the adjustment of effects flowing from causes,
during which
the being upon whom and through whom that adjustment is effected
experiences pain or pleasure.

Etc....