Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00191)

Leon and Steve,

I think the question is What exactly is the rupa? Does an astral rupa 
lead to physical manifestation?

Rupa is a "body" and in terms of the computer, it starts out as a 
body built in the mind of the designer. After taking it's mental body 
it is given an astral body that exists as the manufacturer has parts 
and peices in front of him and is putting them together while holding 
on to the final image. The engineering and functionings all exist 
prior to the actual existance of the final product. 

Another "rupa" would be say a probability wave by which form, limits 
the free "choice" of a particle. Can we say there is a correlation?

Yes and No.

It seems that we always have to come down to the physical to make 
physical changes when it comes to non-biological things. So to put 
atoms together would require far too much energy to create the 
appropriate forces that will pull them together in a certain form. 
Yet, out of our own hands we can put together a computer. 

When it comes to biological entities, the situation is different. 
There are known cases of poeple visualizing away cancer and even 
growing back their hair. We have some control over the production of 
chemicals in the body. There is also the some evidence of healing 
other people and even influencing the growth of plants. 

Similarily, we can influence the functions of a computer by 
putting "thoughts in it's head" through programs and in this way 
change it's capacity. The programs can create "rupas" or models, 
without any control by the operator, a kind of free will set 
according to the limits we give it. Are we also limited by the 
programs hard wired in our own brains?

It seems to me that more research in the theosophical concepts in 
relationship to science is needed for us to come to any clear answers.

Koshek Swaminathan







--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, leonmaurer@a... wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 06/21/04 5:51:07 PM, stevestubbs@y... 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