Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00681)

Hallo Morton,
This is very clear and unveiled given,
Thanks Christina







--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
theosophy@a...> wrote:
> Hallo all of you,
> 
> My vies are:
> 
> I know, that some of you are not agreeing on the following.
> But I find it to be quite good.
> 
> http://www.theosophical.ca/CausalBody1.htm
> http://www.theosophical.ca/Images/causal10a.gif (Diagram IV)
> http://www.theosophical.ca/Images/causal13.gif (Diagram V)
> 
> 
> "CHAPTER III
> 
> THE COMING FORTH OF THE MONADS 
> Before considering the creative activity of the Third Logos, and 
the detailed preparation of the field of evolution, we must note the 
origination of the Monads or units of consciousness, for whose 
evolution in matter the field of a universe is prepared. We shall 
return to their fuller consideration in a later chapter.
> 
> 
> The Myriads of these units, who are to be developed in the coming 
universe, are generated within the divine life, before the field for 
their evolution is formed. Of this forthgoing it has been 
written : "That willed: I shall multiply and be born" 
[Chhandopanishat VI.ii, 3] : thus the Many arise in the One by that 
act of will. The act of will is that of the First Logos, the 
undivided Lord, the Father.
> 
> The Monads are described as sparks of the Supreme Fire, as "Divine 
fragments".The Occult Catechism , quoted in the Secret Doctrine . I., 
145, says: "Lift thy head, O Lanoo; dost thou see one, or countless, 
lights above thee, burning in the midnight sky?' 'I sense One Flame, 
O Gurudeva; I see countless, undetached sparks shining in it'." The 
Flame is Ishvara, in His manifestation, as the First Logos; the 
undetached sparks are the Monads, human and other. The 
word "undetached" should be especially noted, as signifying that the 
Monads are the Logos Himself.
> 
> A Monad may thus be defined as a fragment of the divine life, 
separated off as an individual entity by rarest film of matter, 
matter so rare that, while it gives, a separate form to each, it 
offers no obstacle to the free intercommunication, of a life, thus 
encased, with the surrounding similar lives.
> 
> A Monad is thus not pure consciousness, pure Self, samvit. That is 
an abstraction. In the concrete universe there are always the Self 
and his sheaths, however tenuous the sheaths may be, so that a unit 
of consciousness is inseparable from matter. Hence a Monad is 
consciousness plus matter. 
> 
> The Monad of Theosophy, is the Jivatma of Indian Philosophy, the 
Purusha of the Samkya, the particularised Self of the Vedanta.
> 
> The life of the Monads being thus of the First Logos, they may be 
described as Sons of the Father, just as the Second Logos Himself is 
the Son of the Father; but the Monads are but younger Sons, with none 
of their divine powers, capable of acting in matter denser than that 
of their own plane - the Anupadaka; while the Second Logos, with ages 
of evolution behind Him, stands ready to exercise His divine 
powers, "the first-born " among many brethren.
> 
> Whilst the roots of their life are in the Adi plane, the Monads 
themselves dwell, on the Anupadaka Plane, as yet without vehicles in 
which they can express, themselves, awaiting the day 
of "manifestation" of the Sons of God".There they remain, while the 
Third Logos begins the external work of manifestation, shaping the 
matter of the objective universe. This work will be described, in the 
next chapter.
> 
> Diagram IV indicates the Monads, waiting on their own plane whilst 
the world, in which they are to develop is being fashioned."
> 
> 
> 
> The following might be of help:
> "PS The rejection of self, the anatma doctrine of Buddhism, seems 
on the
> surface to be diametrically opposed to Theosophy, which posits a 
spiritual
> Self. But Blavatsky clearly says that this spiritual Self is a ray 
or
> emanation into our planetary chain from something she calls 
a "divine
> Monad", and so seeing this spiritual Self as maya is not anti-
Theosophy at
> all. And the divine Monad is not a self, so there is really no 
problem at
> all."
> http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/200203/tt00248.html
> 
> 
> 
> H. P. Blavatsky - The secret Doctrine, vol1. Proem, page 14
> 
> The Secret Doctrine establishes three fundamental propositions: -
> (a) An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable PRINCIPLE on
> which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power 
of human
> conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or 
similitude.
> It is beyond the range and reach of thought - in the words of 
Mandukya,
> "unthinkable and unspeakable."
> 
> http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/PROEM.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> H. P. Blavatsky - The secret Doctrine, vol1., page 52: 
> 
> "The term Anupadaka, "parentless," or without progenitors, is a 
mystical designation having several meanings in the philosophy. By 
this name celestial beings, the Dhyan-Chohans or Dhyani-Buddhas, are 
generally meant. But as these correspond mystically to the human 
Buddhas and Bodhisattwas, known as the "Manushi (or human) Buddhas," 
the latter are also designated "Anupadaka," once that their whole 
personality is merged in their compound sixth and seventh principles -
- or Atma-Buddhi, and that they have become the "diamond-souled" 
(Vajra-sattvas),* the full Mahatmas. The "Concealed Lord" (Sangbai 
Dag-po), "the one merged with the absolute," can have no parents 
since he is Self-existent, and one with the Universal Spirit 
(Svayambhu),** the Svabhavat in the highest aspect. The mystery in 
the hierarchy of the Anupadaka is great, its apex being the universal 
Spirit-Soul, and the lower rung the Manushi-Buddha; and even every 
Soul-endowed man is an Anupadaka in a latent state. Hence, when 
speaking of the Universe in its formless, eternal, or absolute 
condition, before it was fashioned by the "Builders" -- the 
expression, "the Universe was Anupadaka." (See Part II., "Primordial 
Substance.")
> 
> 
> 
> [[Footnote(s)]] -------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> * Vajra -- diamond-holder. In Tibetan Dorjesempa; sempa meaning the 
soul, its adamantine quality referring to its indestructibility in 
the hereafter. The explanation with regard to the "Anupadaka" given 
in the Kala Chakra, the first in the Gyu(t) division of the Kanjur, 
is half esoteric. It has misled the Orientalists into erroneous 
speculations with respect to the Dhyani-Buddhas and their earthly 
correspondencies, the Manushi-Buddhas. The real tenet is hinted at in 
a subsequent Volume, (see "The Mystery about Buddha"), and will be 
more fully explained in its proper place.
> 
> 
> 
> ** To quote Hegel again, who with Schelling practically accepted 
the Pantheistic conception of periodical Avatars (special 
incarnations of the World-Spirit in Man, as seen in the case of all 
the great religious reformers) . . . . "the essence of man is 
spirit . . . . only by stripping himself of his finiteness and 
surrendering himself to pure self-consciousness does he attain the 
truth. Christ-man, as man in whom the Unity of God-man (identity of 
the individual with the Universal consciousness as taught by the 
Vedantins and some Adwaitees) appeared, has, in his death and history 
generally, himself presented the eternal history of Spirit -- a 
history which every man has to accomplish in himself, in order to 
exist as Spirit." -- Philosophy of History. Sibree's English 
translation, p. 340."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re-reading Bowen's notes could also be helpful.
> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/metaphys/th-bowen.htm#n2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from
> 
> M. Sufilight with peace and love...
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]