Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00042)

June 7th 2004

Dear Friend:

Many thanks for your contribution.

D.

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

Dallas


-----Original Message-----
From: Truth [mailto:truths@sbcglobal.net] 
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 2:36 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: I'll wait for you there like a stone

Hi. I just joined the group. I don't know if the author of this 
message is still here, because I didn't see the original message,.. 
so I copied the original from one of the expansive reply from 
Dallas. I hope to go back and read and learn from what was 
written. I am not as well read, though I have a few ideas to share.

First, I was reminded of the lyrics sung in a song by a band, Audio 
Slave( http://www.audioslave.com/ ), here is a copy from a website: 
http://www.likeastone.com/ 
-----------------------------------------------------

"Like A Stone"

On a cobweb afternoon
In a room full of emptiness
By a freeway I confess
I was lost in the pages
Of a book full of death
Reading how we'll die alone
And if we're good we'll lay to rest
Anywhere we want to go

(chorus)
In your house I long to be
Room by room patiently
I'll wait for you there
Like a stone I'll wait for you there
Alone

On my deathbed
I will pray
To the gods and the angels
Like a pagan to anyone
Who will take me to heaven
To a place I recall
I was there so long ago
The sky was bruised
The wine was bled
And there you led me on

(chorus)
In your house I long to be
Room by room patiently
I'll wait for you there
Like a stone
I'll wait for you there
Alone

And on I read
Until the day was done
And I sat in regret
Of all the things I've done
For all that I've blessed
And all that I've wronged
In dreams until my death
I will wander on
------------------------------------------

"Not all who wander are lost", J.R.R. Tolkien
-------------------------------------------------

About your message, here is a similar quote. Have you read Rumi, 
where he mentions?:
---------------------------------------------
"I died as a mineral and became a plant;
I died as a plant and rose to animal;
I died as animal and I was a man.
Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?
Yet once more I shall die as man to soar
With angels blest. But even from an angel
I must pass on: all except God must perish.
When I have sacrificed my angel soul,
I shall become what no mind ever conceived."

From, http://www.theosophy.org/tlodocs/teachers/JalaluddinRumi.htm 

I highly recommend the above link, as you may see why for yourself 
if you read the article.
-----------------------------------

Forthrightly, I think that a bluntly honest comment to your question 
of the anthropomorphic nature of the the model given in theosophical 
books of "evolution", is that the physical body of man is the most 
sophisticated. And many will say that it is obviously contestable, 
for example: who can understand the "conversational" calls of 
whales, the cleverness of monkies, or the compassion of elephants? 
Nature is vast, and the animals are still not all known, so how 
could anyone claim that man is the most evolved when ... evolved 
compared to what? We don't even know them all. New discoveries are 
still happening. Some folks ask, what about the Lock Ness animal 
or "sasquatch"(bigfoot) or what about aliens and how aliens compare 
to mankind? Well, those are some of the questions.

It comes down to witnesses, for those who don't readily see it 
themselves. If one is not a seer, and wants to know what seers see, 
there is the option of asking around and seeing what people have to 
say, of reading what reputable seers have said, and studying the 
subject in appropriately, etc..

The theosophical tradition, is one tradition(all inclusive 
tradition, in my opinion and others) where one could search.

The seers of theosophy, as far as I understand, say that human 
beings are the only beings with self reflecting minds. Animals have 
instinctual consciousness, is my guess, and many people are also 
functioning with their consciousness centered in instinct.
With where we are at in the range of conscious evolution, we can 
either face instinct or face intuition, as far as what we are moving 
in the direction of. We can either progress or stagnate.
Instinct covers a wide range of intelligent activity. To say that 
animals function instinctually is not to deny them emotions or 
intelligence. It is only to say that their consciousness is not 
self reflecting. It is reflecting but not self reflecting. And 
that reflecting includes reflecting about their loyalties, making 
descisions, reflecting about their attractions, learning aversions, 
etc... Many people understate the range of the subject of the 
consciousness of plants, animals and stuff.

It is not only the rang of frequencies that man is functioning on, 
but the fact that we can witness those freqencies. It is the self 
reflecting transcendence that is unique to man. You may disagree 
with this.

Many people unfamiliar with the ideas of the evolution of 
consciousnes think mostly physically when the idea of evolution is 
mentioned. This is why there is confusion. If the idea is 
rejected, fine, though if I was part of the conversation I might try 
to talk the idea out. People learn by extension. I personally 
prefer to see a conversation understood rather than agreed upon, if 
such a choice is to be made, depending on the situation.

Karma is not only physical, it is mental and emotional(feelings) 
also. I have a recording of a talk given on Karma that you are 
welcome to download. linked through, http://www.truths.cc/ or 
directly 
http://f1.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/c8hum@sbcglobal.net/lst?.dir=/Bar
rett+Culmback+-Talks/Karma&.order=&.view=l&.src=bc&.done=http%
3a//f1.pg.briefcase.yahoo.com/ it is in .wma 20kbps 

It is an absract statement to say that the higher self is "all of 
organic matter", because matter is the correspondence of 
consciousness. Matter corresponds; it is the vehical and the 
manifestation. Consciousness is noumenal and causal. Changing the 
environment does not necessarily change the people. Cleaning up the 
neighborhood doesn't necessarilly make people more virtuous, because 
people have to make that change themselves 'in their own 
consciousness'.

Appearances can be decieving. "nothing is what it seems."

One phrase about evolution, is "the tendency to revert to previous 
forms"

another word that has to do with evolution is recapitulation or 
reliving experiences similar to previous experiences. And a key 
idea in theosophical commentaries of evolution is that of cycles. 
How can there be evolution without cycles? 

Cycles within cycles withing cycles. Cycle overlap. For example, 
if every seven years, our bodies are completely recycled, there are 
also other cycles going on within the body. 

It is up to each individual to decide for themselves what they 
think about all that. I am trying to sum up these ideas as best I 
can. How well, maybe not good enough?

Right or wrong, I hope that these thoughts made some sense.

Namaste and best regards, Truth C.








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

-----Original Message-----
From: M
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 7:57 PM
To:
Subject: I'll wait for you there like a stone


When attempting to explain theosophy to friends
(non-theosophists) ridicule seems to be general
outcome. Although interested many cannot grasp the
fundamental concepts enough to appreciate the deeper
meanings of theosophy. For example, a statement such
as:

"The Breath becomes a stone; the stone, a plant; the
plant, an animal; the animal, a man; the man, a
spirit; and the spirit, a god".

would imply, through a literal interpretation, that
evolution proceeds from a stone to plant....to man and
so forth. It seems to be a very anthropocentric
evolutionary progression. Why, I have often been
asked, is it not evolution from animal to lion, or
animal to kangaroo, or even animal to fungus? It is
hard to explain that "man" does not actually mean a
hominoid with five fingers and five toes, an opposable
thumb etc; but "man" is a type of association between
different elements in the manvantara; "man" is a
frequency of consciousness along a continuum of
consciousness similar to different, seemingly distinct
sounds being different frquencies of noise along a
continuum of noise.

>From this little I here this is how I've interpreted
the recent posts from my own karmic perspective.
Here's something else my own karmicity has thrown up
of late: there is a strong analogy between the
theosophical concept of the ego and biological
organisms. I've been struggling to find the right
words for this but I'll try the best I can. The
personal ego is analogous to an individual organism
(i.e. that tree or bird outside your window); the
reincarnating ego is analogous to the biological
concept of the species; and the higher self is all of
organic matter - the unbroken chain of evolution that
connects all of us to to every single individual,
population and species that has ever existed on earth.
Just as the personal ego exists because of karma,
accumulated karma, collective karma etc, so the
individual exists because of the past evolutionary
history (karma) of its species.....starting to lose
it. I hope all of this is not completely off the mark.

Regards,
Mic








Yahoo! Groups Links