Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00025)

In a message dated 05/28/04 8:29:14 AM, prmoliveira@yahoo.com writes:

>--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, leonmaurer@a... wrote:
>
>> The "Absolute Reality" being entirely outside of that manifest 
multi-spatial 
>> unity, as well as beyond the direct correspondence between all things in 
it, 
>> both visible and invisible. 
>
>> When we separate the infinite, unchanging Absolute from the finite, 
>> ever changing Cosmos -- there are two "realities" to consider. The 
>>former cannot be categorized, but the latter can. 
>
>> As I said before, it's important to keep our categories separate in 
>>mind in any discourse... 
>
>Your posting is a clear example of theosophical theology: dualistic, 
>categorical and authoritarian. You are not "discussing" anything; you 
>are presenting a crystallized and dogmatic view, in spite of your 
>more than forty years of study of Theosophy.
>
Really? Clear? How do you figure that from what I wrote? I thought I was 
simply restating and clarifying pure theosophical metaphysics (not "theology") 
as it was taught by HPB (and the Masters) in the Secret Doctrine. Do you 
think her (or their) "categorical and authoritative" (positive and direct, to 
"intuitive students") "presentation" of theosophical metaphysics was a 
"crystallized and dogmatic view"? Maybe you should think about the ideas behind what 
both she and I said, and then, if you have reason to disagree, or ideas to 
contribute, discuss them or point out alternative views (without ad hominem personal 
remarks). 

In any event, theosophy cannot be "dogmatic," since it claims no authority 
except what each of us proves for ourselves through our own individual self 
devised and self determined efforts. In the same sense, we should take what anyone 
says about or how they interpret it with a grain of salt -- and either prove 
or disprove it for ourselves. 

>> Incidentally, anyone who doesn't need those two categories of proof, 
>> whether subjective or objective, can be only a blind believer or 
>>disbeliever based on "testimony" or "authority " -- who can never be a true 
>>occultist or completely "enlightened" with respect to the nature of ALL 
>>Reality (both Absolute and Relative).
>> 
>> Leon 
>
>But I must thank you for reminding me that I am not enlightened and 
>that I will never be an occultist. You have helped me to remind 
>myself that all I really want is to study Theosophy with an 
>unburdened mind.
>
>Pedro

Excellent idea. That is, if I understand that "unburdened mind" means a mind 
that is "full" of correct views (as offered by the theosophical teachers) -- 
and not burdened by wrong views dredged up out of one's lower nature, or 
otherwise. I also hope such a study method helps us each prove to ourselves that 
theosophical metaphysics is exactly what HPB said it was... The basis of all 
reality -- which requires the in-depth study and knowledge of its metaphysics 
before such reality can be thoroughly meditated on and completely understood and 
comprehended. 

Maybe you should read more carefully what I said -- on an impersonal level -- 
and simply take it as my generalized conclusion with respect to some people 
(not you in particular) who do not require either subjective or objective 
"proof" of the metaphysics of both theosophy and occultism... And are willing to 
trust and believe their intuition, based on either fantasy or the testimony of 
others (including HPB, myself, as well as their own religious teachers) -- 
without tempering such so called "intuition" with their reason... As both HPB and 
WQJ said was an essential requirement of theosophical study. Not doing so, 
they say, engenders the risk of being caught up in our own illusions, wrong 
conception buried in our lower mind, or astral projections (by Dugpas or 
Elementals) that we think are true ideations coming from our higher intuitive mind. 

Theosophy teaches that we cannot contact spirit except through it's "vehicle" 
Buddhi -- which is the root of our intuitive mind. To "hear the Voice of the 
Silence" is to do so through the vehicle of our inner eye and ear -- which is 
our Buddhi's mindful thoughts or ideations not blinded or deafened by the 
lower mind's thoughts or ideas. To understand this, one must realize that the 
"Voice" spoken of is the highest vibrations of the Spirit or Atma that we can 
only experience indirectly through its ideation or thought in our higher mind, 
unburdened by the thoughts in the lower mind. 

Therefore, for anyone to lead students in the direction of mind "emptiness" 
rather than mind "fullness," can do them much harm. Remember, the mind can 
only hold one thought at a time (according to Patanjali). When that thought is 
the true reality (not "emptiness" which is beyond thought) no untrue thought 
projected from outside ourselves or dredged up out of the uncontrolled lower 
mind can enter and influence our understandings or our actions. In this light, 
WQJ was justified in saying, on authority of the Secret Doctrine and confirmed 
by Patanjali, "One should never stop thinking." Except, perhaps, at the last 
moment (after traveling the ladder of meditative thought) before experiencing 
pure consciousness or spirit itself (Samadhi). And even then, the higher 
Buddhi-Manas must continue hearing the "Voice of the Silence" and comprehending 
whatever level of reality has been reached. 

Careful study and concentrated meditation (one-pointed thought) on the 
metaphysics of theosophy -- which is the prerequisite of attaining the Siddhis or 
psychic powers of mind and, afterwards, ultimate enlightenment, is far more 
complex than simply clearing the mind of all thought -- which can only lead to an 
empty vehicle of spirit or consciousness without knowledge or wisdom. That, 
is not the goal of meditation.

According to Patanjali -- the only way to clear the mind of wrong thoughts 
("modifications of the thinking principle") is to replace them with correct 
thoughts (whether those correct thoughts are with or without a "seed"). This 
requires a thorough knowledge and understanding of the nature of the deepest 
metaphysical reality on the level of an awakened Buddhi-Manas. Thus, as Buddha 
indicated, we must remain always "mindful." The direct experience in the 
meditative practice that Patanjali (or Buddha) recommends, coupled with a thorough 
knowledge and understanding of theosophical metaphysics -- based on one's own self 
devised and self determined efforts -- will "prove" this beyond a shadow of a 
doubt. 

In any event, I'm sorry that you took my previous statements personally. 
But, if the shoe fits, wear it. And, if not, at least stay true to yourself. 
But, I wouldn't recommend avoiding correct study and practice as taught by all 
the Masters... And, then, finding out for oneself why the thoughtless or 
"unburdened mind" (or "clarity of mind," as said by one Master) is, along with 
"fear" and "old age," the three great dangers or interference's with the 
attainment of enlightenment... For which, the acquirement of the Siddhi's or "psychic 
powers of mind" (whether practiced or not) -- that are based on a thorough 
knowledge of occult metaphysics, must come first -- i.e., prior to knowing the 
"ultimate division of time," or true enlightenment.

I hope you take all this non personally, and if you have any comments, or 
wish to further discuss these ideas (coming from HPB, WQJ, myself, or others) -- 
please refer to the points made, or the ideas themselves, and not to the one's 
who present them.

Best wishes,

Leon