Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00190)

In a message dated 06/21/04 5:51:07 PM, stevestubbs@yahoo.com writes:

>Every object has not only atoms but a shape into which the atoms have 
>been formed. A computer, for example, has atoms, but is also shaped 
>like a computer. This shape is the computer's form or rupa. We 
>would think of this as something which exists obly conceptually, but 
>Theosophy maintains that it exists as a thing in itself, although 
>exactly what it is is never made clear.
>
>What is clear is that the rupa precedes the physical manifestation. 
>Atoms could not be formed into a computer if the rupa did not exist. 
>More intriguingly, the rupa is said to exist at least briefly after 
>the manifestation ceases. This is why Blavatsky favored cremation. 
>As long as the body has not completely disintegrated, the rupa 
>continues to exist. If the body is reduced to dust by means of 
>cremation, the rupa supposedly disintegrates shortly afterward. 
>
>Since the rupa is one of the skandhas it is one of the sub principles 
>of the fourth principle, kama. Since rupa is the first of the 
>skandhas, kama rupa is the first and lowest of the seven sub 
>principles of kama. (No, Dallas, I am not going to take the time to 
>look up page numbers to support all these statements. They are all 
>in HPB's writings.)

Really? Including the story about a manufactured structure like a computer ha
ving a rupa, too? I seriously doubt it. Besides, according to the 
theosophical glossary, the definition of Rupa is; "Form, image, similitude; body, 
vehicle; contrasted with arupa (formless)." Therefore the final physical form of 
any object would be considered as its "rupa." Why would such a manufactured 
item like a computer need a pre structural rupa? Unless you considered its 
"blueprints" as equivalent to the astral bodies of living biological beings. 
But, that sounds kind of far fetched to me... Since a computer, being an 
unconscious artifactual assemblage of equally unconscious sub structures composed of 
physical atoms, doesn't grow by a process of self assemblage of proteins guided 
by the magnetic images of an astral body linked to chromosomes and their 
genetic coding of amino acids, etc. 

In fact, all the above statements, with respect to rupas, seems to be a most 
illogical assemblage of nonsense that has little basis in the theosophical 
teachings outlined in the Secret Doctrine. In fact, from a metaphysically sound 
point of view, it blows the whole subsequent discussion, with respect to 
teleportation and occult processes of materialization, etc., into a cocked hat. 

Therefore, how can you justify conflating the human body -- and its so called 
pre formative "rupa," that is actually the astral form which precedes the 
physical in the normal process of genetic evolution and growth of living beings 
(starting from their zygote fructified by the union of two gametes) -- with the 
construction of a computer that is an assembled artifact composed of humanly 
designed machine made parts? What evidence is there that can lead to the 
presumption that "atoms can be formed into a computer" by the same process that a 
human body is evolved and grown? (That is, where the astral "rupa" has to 
precede the final physical form.) By what process of "living," self generated 
evolutionary growth can such an artificial structure come about, and have the 
same seven fold nature as a human being? So, how could there be such a thing as 
the astral "rupa" of a computer that must precede its assemblage into its 
final physical form? 

I thought HPB made it very clear that if all the atoms or even the parts of 
an artificial physical construction, such as a pipe organ (or a computer) were 
laid out side by side for an eternity -- they could never form themselves or 
self assemble into the structure of the finished machine -- even if all the 
blueprints of the final structure were laid on top of them, or if the greatest 
adept in the world would concentrate his mind and will upon it. 

As for materialization's... It may be possible to bend light by the powers of 
mind and will, and project a visualized image of an object to appear as a 
hologram -- which could be taken for the real thing. But I seriously doubt that 
anyone, including those on the level of a Master occultist, could actually 
manifest a physical cup that someone can drink out of, or dematerialize such a 
cup and re-materialize it at a remote location. Such an improbability could 
apply to any item that achieved its form or structure from logical human design 
and engineering aided by scientifically sound chemical and physical 
manufacturing processes. 

If you carefully read "all" the writings of HPB (as I have) you will find 
that she has consistently denied such possibilities and has said that all such 
so, called "Magic" or mysterious appearances and disappearances cannot have 
supernatural causes, and are based simply on the proper application of 
"glamour"... That is, manipulating the mind of the viewer rather than the actual forces 
that make up the objects themselves. 

It therefore becomes quite evident that all this talk of actual teleportation 
of real objects and their dematerialization and materialization is just a lot 
of speculative whistling in the wind, and a waste of time... As is all talk 
about apparently "miraculous" occurrences based on blind belief, or on 
supposition without direct evidence of the processes involved along with the knowledge 
of the logical scientific principles behind them.

LHM