Theos-Talk Archives (June 2004 Message tt00239)

June 29 2004


Dear Gerry:

Thanks for your notes they are most useful.

It occurs to me that in our world there is fundamentally a single
"School" of discipline that leads to "perfection." [We could say from
one point of view, that we are all students, and if we are virtuous,
then we are also "chelas" of the single Great Philosophy -- regardless
of how it is named ] That is, if you can agree that ideals tend to
converge to a point of unanimity. 

I realize this may be stretching idealism quite a bit.  

I have found the problem with names and categories is that they tend
so separate rather than to unite on principles. How can our thoughts
and aspirations be impersonalized?

I would also say that trying to intellectualize THEOSOPHY without much
or any of the "Heart doctrine" is fatal to this kind of hope for any
real progress. I read, again and again, that real WISDOM can only be
acquired by the application of the strictest rules of virtue and
service to others. 

To some this seems an improbable combination. But how can we define
real "Enlightenment?"

You speak of developing "faith" in Mme. Blavatsky, in the Masters of
Wisdom, and Their teachings. You also speak of other "lineages."  

As for me, I study what is offered and rejecting faith," I seek to
discover the ultimate reason for any statement and look into its
cohesion with other parts of a universal system, some of which are
clear to me.

Yes we each build our own castle of thought and of reliance. But if
we become turgid or immobile in any way, we loose the ability to check
other systems and presentations with such realities as we may have
secured. ["Reality" is always a 'maybe.' But our ability to say this
demonstrates to me the REALITY of my questing Self." ]
 
Extrapolating from that, I conclude there are other such "realities"
in existence, and all taken together, they form a Universe of
inter-related REALITIES - a ONENESS, and hence the immeasurable and
indefinable ABSOLUTE as a background. [S D Three FUNDAMENTALS, pp
14-20 Vol. I]

"Esoteric tradition" is a phrase left undefined,. Although there are
many attempted definitions -- all somewhat partial, and usually
reliant on "belief and faith." [Those two great uncertainties that
tend to rob us of our self-induced and self conducted search for
TRUTH.] 

You mention several of the Buddhistic/Tibetan "lineages," and their
traditions. Now if those can be combined into one, what is secured?

Gaining "good karma " as a goal, seems self-serving and intensely
selfish. This runs contra to the ideal way which is the service of
others.  

If we are all immortals together then our advance will assist others,
and their will help us. If we try to out-strip others we simply adopt
the "Dharmakaya" {Voice, p. 78) or the method of the "Pratyekha
Buddha" (Voice, p. 48) and retire into "Nirvana" for along time --
until evolution catches up with us and we are swept back into the
stream of common work -- as illustrated in S D II 79-80, 94-5,
110-11. 

Personally, I would rather be wise and working than static and doing
nothing. 

As you say the current run of articles in various magazines is not too
encouraging [Have you seen and read The AQUARIAN THEOSOPHIST
published free monthly at ultinla@juno.com ?]  

As I have said before I prefer to base my studies on ORIGINAL
THEOSOPHY which at least has the virtue of being primary, and as you
say it does include a wide area of reference and therefore to me is
less liable to be sectarian and limited in its expositions. 

You ask why this trove of precious lore is not studied by modern
"theosophists" well if they can answer they expose to themselves first
of all their own biases. Each one of has some But if we are to be
honest and true, then we have to detect and get rid off them. We are
all "tamasic" (lazy) in some ways, and the power of "Rajas" energy or
VIRYA ( the dauntless energy that fights its way to the supernal truth
out of the realm of lies terrestrial.) needs to be depended on and
reinforced. 

Every formulation we have made of our :fundamentals" and :principles"
need to be exposed again to the Sun of impersonality and universality,
to see if it hold us away from immutability and REALITY. 

We only have in us the ray of the ONE CONSCIOUSNESS that pierces up
and own through the 7 planes of being and serves to uphold the memory
of our experiences in those levels. The "oneness" is the ATMA -- the
HIGHEST SELF in us. It is present in all other beings. It is the root
of BROTHERHOOD. It eliminates the sense of separateness, the "I and
Thou." 

Recently I wrote an essay reviewing the several "Races" we have been
through on the round of reincarnation. Then yesterday THE GREAT
MASTER'S LETTER. Taken together they answer some of your observations
about the modern students.

We have to present THEOSOPHY in a comprehensible way. 

We also have to use analogies and illustrations that are satisfactory
to the stage of mental perception inquirers have. Your are right that
if we choose the wrong ones (because familiar to us) we do not provide
those with information, only wonderment, and rejection. So our task is
to simplify and yet for deeper students, provide fodder for deeper
reflection. 

I think HPB's method in The KEY TO THEOSOPHY is perhaps one of the
best. To that I would draw attention to Mr. Judge's Answers in the
THEOSOPHY FORUM. If one uses The OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY -- Judge, much
becomes easier and for answering questions the ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS
by Crosbie is most helpful.

Finally, it is all of us , older student who have to find the best way
of helping others to grasp the rather simple ideas of Karma and
rebirth under Law not the whim of a God made by Priests to confound
the inquiries of those who now suffer because they are the victims of
their own earlier making of errors. Why don't we listen to our Voice
of Conscience -- that of the higher Self. [see S D II 167 ]

[more notes below]

Dallas
 
=================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald S
Sent: Monday, June 21, 
To: 
Subject: RE: Theosophical Chelas 


<< Dear Gerry:

Why not adopt the view that "Theosophist is who theosophy does." The
title is inapplicable in any other context. Hence we who study
THEOSOPHY call ourselves "students." >>
---------------------

Dear Dallas, thanks for your comments. I suspect that what "Theosophy
does"
is pretty subjective, but on the whole I agree with you here. But I
feel
that there may/should be a difference between a student and a Chela,
the
latter being a more formalized and serious student. The average
Theosophist
is a student who intellectually studies Theosophy. A few students vow
to
themselves to gain enlightenment for the sake of others through a
Theosophical Path, and these are today's Chelas.


<< After examining it in many aspects for some 60 years I would say:
>>

A long time indeed.


<< It is not speculative nor a system of belief. >>

Oh yes it is. You cannot "prove" anything at all Dallas, not to me,
and not
to yourself if you are honest with yourself. 


Theosophy is the intellectual,
or exoteric, interpretation of the direct observations, which are
esoteric,
of a long lineage of Adepts. 

When we look around, we will see many other
lineages of Adepts who make direct observations with very different
interpretations. 

Each group proclaims their own validity, and we are left
with having faith in one or the other. I know you don't like me using
the
term "faith" but that is what it all comes down to. 

As Theosophists we have
faith in Blavatsky. We have faith in her Masters. We have faith in her
specific lineage of Adepts that gave us the Esoteric Tradition. And so
on
and on. 


<< It provides information,
knowledge and suggests virtue as a imperative practice.>>

The "knowledge" provided is in the form of intellectual written texts
and
is therefore exoteric. There are countless spiritual lineages of
Adepts
providing us with intellectual knowledge. 


Some, like the Kagyu lineage of Tilopa, Naropa, Marpa, Milarepa, and
Gampopa, also provide practices to gain experiential knowledge. If
Blavatsky's lineage did this, she never passed it on to us. What is
the reason or rationale for practicing virtue?
Is it to gaiin good karma for ourselves?


<< It does not seek adherents.>>

Good thing in light of our low membership and even fewer Thosophical
Adepts
(I am joking). But technically it does seek adherents, and even
Chelas. The
desire for Chelas comes from the Great Sacrifice and is the rationale
for
the Hierarchy of Compassion. The whole idea or rationale for a lineage
is
to continue passing the light onto others. Otherwise the lineage is
broken
and ends.


<< Hey who desire to know something of our world in
depth, seek that which it offers.>>

OK. And I did that.


<< It is history and philosophy. >>

History is flakey and the historical aspects of the SD are hidden in
blinds
and allegory and myth. The big problem I have with viewing Theosophy
as
history is that its mayavic naure is superimposed with a reality that
it
doesn't really have. 

As to "philosophy," I don't recall reading one single post from you,
Dallas, about the mayavic and illusory nature of manvantaric
manifestation.
I assume that this is because you impute an existence to our
manvantara
that isn't there. And you are not alone. When I read Sunrise, Fohat,
Theos-World, and other publications I am impressed with the belief in
the
reality of the whole evolution business. The average Theosophist today
asumes an existence and a reality that is not there. And this false
sense
of reality is given to newbies and so the false view continues.
Blavatsky
says that matter and spirit are two sides of the same thing and that
both
sides are maya or illusion and she talks about our manvantara as being
a
conditional reality. Why is this important teaching buried and ignored
by
today's "students" of Theosophy?


<< The history is well covered in ISIS UNVEILED and the SECRET
DOCTRINE
and sundry articles by HPB such as A LAND OF MYSTERY.>>

I don't beleive in a literal interpretation of the SD. Its too
illogical
and it poses more questions than it answers. 


<< The philosophy is clear, direct and supports / defends itself. >>

This can't be true. If it was true, the whole world's population would
be
Theosophists by now. Theosophy is ignored and ridiculed by mainstream
humanity BECAUSE its literal interpretations are illogical and demand
as
much faith as Chrisitianity or any other religion. 


The THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT can only be saved
by esotericism. 

The very fact that there is an esoteric aspect to Theosophy
is its saving grace. In order to arrive at this "esoteric aspect"
members
have to gain experiential knowledge of the planes and globes of our
planetary chain. Nothing less will do. And it is not easy. I have been
communicating with Mauri for a long time now on this list, and he has
yet
to understand cosmic planes. I suspect that the average Theosophist is
in
the same box. I once had a Theosophist tell me that they liked the
Tree of
Life better than HPB's planes and globes. In light of so much
opposition
and resistance (and yes I know that you have your own resistance too)
how
can the TM expect to live much longer? Its life is being sucked dry by
its
own preponderance of intellectualism.

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

DTB	Each symbol has its uses, but the real problem is those who
should explain don't know enough themselves to do that, so they leave
inquirers in bewilderment.

There are some excellent articles on Symbology and The SECRET DOCTRINE
devotes much space to its

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

<< The prime import of Theosophy is: If it is found correct then it
is
worth living by. >>

So far, it has been found correct by less than .1% of the world's
population. Why are we failing so many people? I can easily imagine a
Chrisitian saying the same words. In fact, change "Theosophy" in your
sentence above to any religion you want and it still applies.


<< Here are some thoughts to consider:
The SECRET DOCTRINE .
H P B says at the outset that it is "written for students of
"occultism." >>

"Students of occultism" have learned not to take words literally and
they
know how to see through blinds. The same cannot be said for
Theosophists.


<< What is the "Occultism (secrecy) ?" >>

Occult means hidden, it does not mean secret. Secrecy implies a
conscious
decision on the part of Knowers to keep information from others.
Blavatsky's lineage does not hold back information in secrecy from
anyone.
Occultism means "hidden knowledge" in general and "esoteric knowledge"
in
particular -- which is to say experiential knowledge, and experiential
knowlege is "hidden" because it cannot be given to others but they
have to
obtain it for themselves. The taste of a peach is not a secret, but it
remains hidden for those who have never tasted a peach. The taste of a
peach is experiential knowledge that is obtained by actually eating a
peach, it cannot be obtained by talking about one.

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

DTB	To study and to learn is the only answer

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


<< Can we not say that it is plain
everywhere, >>

Yes! It is right before your eyes.


<<but we have not stumbled on to it, as a cohesive whole 
because we have failed to examine all our surroundings and our 
present condition with care and detachment? >>

We have not "stumbled on to it" because we have no direct experience
of the
cosmic planes. These planes contain millions of invisible inhabited
worlds
and we are surrounded by them but don't normally experience them. But
they
can, in fact, be experienced directly, if we TRY and DARE.

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

DTB Why do that if we have not mastered this one or our own
faculties? Sounds like a distraction from the real work at hand.

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


<< Anything that is true
is part of THEOSOPHY . It is all-inclusive. >>

This is a good underlying assumption, but is completely and hopelessly
unprovable.

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

DTB	I don't agree to that. To me it is the most obvious thing.

I have often offered my simple view, but am still waiting for
questions or refutation.

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


<< Great Hermes, of yore, said: "MAN KNOW THYSELF." >>

And yet how few have been able to do so...when we look carefully at
our
"self" we will not ever find it, because it doesn't exist as a
findable
object.

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

DTB	Perhaps as a "subject" and an interior search of ones'
abilities using our Mind is the way.

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


<< Some think that in our present hurly burly world this general and
Particular kind of study is wasted time, for them. They assume 
that they have to deal with the present, but, on reexamination, the 
goals that most have been presented with, for this "present," are
indefinite and indistinct -- and all, as it seems, terminates for the
individual, with the wall of oblivion we call "death." >>

For the average Theosophist or "student of Theosophy" their own death
will
also be a "wall of oblivion." During life, manas imputes a self or an
individuality onto the skandhas. At death this imputation comes to a
temporary end, and the result is an apparent annilhiation just like we
expereince no-self in deep dreamless sleep or coma. Gaining an
intellectual
knowlege of Theosophy during life won't help us at death.

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

DTB	Theosophy (as in the Key) does not teach this. There is
assimilation of virtue and truth acquired

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


<< Thinking over the development of the way in which THEOSOPHY was
offered to us in those early days we find: 
As an introduction to studying the SECRET DOCTRINE we ought to
recall
that first, ISIS UNVEILED was published. (1877) >>

OK. I like Isis.


<< If this is read we acquire a survey of much of the history and
philosophy that the R C Church spent over 1,000 years in trying to
obliterate. Theosophy is in effect a "bridge" between the present
and
its ancient and forgotten sources. >>

Well, I would hope that it is much more than that. I have no interest
in
history or bridges. A bridge joins together one illusion with another.
History is plastic just as the future is, and so neither really
exists. The
so-called present is meant to be a bridge between past and future, but
as
soon as we observe the present moment, it is already the past. So, the
past
is plastic and the future is plastic and the present is simply their
interface. Where is the "reality" in any of this?

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

DTB	There are linear, undular, vibrational and spherical
approaches to all. What happens in any plane of nature affects the
rest. History if linear is not totally an "illusion." We have perhaps
a tendency to treat what we don't like as the "dust of illusions." And
try to find a rug to hide it under. 

But it is as eternal as any record made in the Akasa by the Lipika.
So it is referred to and used by the Adepts.

The Traditions you mention are also illustrations of that fact I
think ?

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


<< In reading ISIS UNVEILED we find it refers to many sources of
theogony, history, science and philosophy that are (to us) of an
"Eastern" character. [We should remember that Christianity and
Masonry are of an Eastern origin. Judaism traces its roots back to
Egypt, Assyria, Chaldea, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and ultimately to
Vedic philosophy in India. ] >>

Well, OK, hard to argue with this. But how does any of this help make
our
lives better? How does it help alleivate our suffering?


<< To help us, H P B worked at the end of her life on the compilation
of
a THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY -- a very helpful book for the student who is
faced with statements referring to those ancient sources. Her friend
and "secretary" George Mead finished the book and has made it
available to us. It embodies items from the "Glossary" that HPB had
attached to the end of the 2nd edition of her: The KEY TO THEOSOPHY,
republished just before her death. >>

More intellectul knowlege. Adding blocks of intellectual knowledge to
our
memory banks does what? helps us how? I am amazed at how few seems to
understand Blavatsky even though they study her words. I think its
more
important to gain understanding of what we have already studied than
to
just keep on adding chunks of intellectual knowledge. 

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

DTB	As above, almost be first understood logically and
consecutively and also coherently, or it is valueless.

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


<< A study of the book ISIS UNVEILED, shows that it was followed by
Mr.
Sinnett's (and others) correspondence with the Masters of Wisdom, and
many discussions with HPB and col. Olcott. >>

OK, but what is your point? How do we sift the chaff from the wheat of
their discussions?

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

DTB	I am describing thee history of the development of the
"original Teachings of THEOSOPHY 

We have the advantage of seeing all done 100 years ago. They.
actually living then. were watching it develop, and if they were
studying then they progressed in time along the lines I survey.

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


<< Mr. Sinnett wrote ESOTERIC BUDDHISM and THE OCCULT WORLD.. These
two
books popularized THEOSOPHY But they had errors in them due to his
way of understanding. HPB's The SECRET DOCTRINE corrected those. >>

Yes, demonstrating the inherent limitations of intelllectual
knowledge.


<< Mme. Blavatsky had from 1879 on, issued the magazine THEOSOPHIST.
Many articles therein discussed aspects of the philosophy disclosed
in
ISIS UNVEILED and added to that, certain errors of understanding in
ESOTERIC BUDDHISM and THE OCCULT WORLD were looked into.>>

More relatively useless history that may or may not be true. I tend to
believe it though. But my believing it doesn't make it so.


<< Later two more magazines began publication In America the PATH was
started in 1886. And, in London, in 1887, LUCIFER was started by HPB.
More discussions and further teachings were advanced. >>

These all contain intellectual gymnastics which were important for the
day
but unneccessary for a Path.


<< This necessitated the writing of the SECRET DOCTRINE (1888) -- in
which two main things were placed in view and discussion thereon was
adjusted: >>

Actually there is no end to neccessary exoteric explanations because
each
poses as many questions as it answers.


<< (1)	A history of the formation of the World, and >>

This history is largely mythical. The "world" here is conditional
where
conditions are all karmic.

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

DTB	Mythical to you, but also a study in Karma

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




Life is a grand and wondrous game and these are the rules under which
we
have agreed to play.



Our "spiritual soul" is deathless relative to the physical body, but
it is
karmic and will end someday.

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

DTB	Why ? Sounds like a waste of time and energy as you phrase
it. 

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


<< and the Goal that evolution as
a whole is aspiring to and involved in forging. It is a Goal
described
by some as UNIVERSAL PERFECTION for all beings.. >>

Here is probably the foremost illogical statement that Theosophists
can
make. 

It assumes that "universal perfection" does not exist now but will
exist someday in the future, which in turn assumes the existence of
past,
present, and future as if time could be divided up that way. It
assumes an
impossible origin in the past, and proposes an impossible future. 

And it is
all based on the assumption that how we experience mortality is
correct,
even though HPB tells us that it is all maya. My own assumption is
that we
are already have "universal perfection" and we just need to become
aware of
it. There is no way to prove which assumption is correct, but my
assumption
is relatively free of the illogic that abounds your assumption,
Dallas. 

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

DTB	Well, can you find a better description of a potential "goal?"


What does the doctrine of the Monads mean ?

What does the development of self-consciousness imply -- and I mean
ESOTERICALLY ?

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


<< It declares, and offers proof that the whole Universe, all Nature,
is
DEIFIC. >>

It offers no such proof to anyone. If offers faith to anyone ready to
listen. The statement "all nature is deific" is an unprovable
assumption.
If I am wrong, then all you have to do is to show me your "proof."

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

DTB	Is my line of thought so meaningless to you only, or to
everyone ?

What good alternatives are there ?

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


The Universe is GOD. Nature is GOD. GOD is the same for all. >>

More unprovable assumptions, or possibly conclusions based on
unprovable
assumptions. The "nature is god" statement sounds pantheistic and will
be
rejected by mainstream humanity. Of course if you have proof...


<< On this, the practice of BROTHERHOOD, virtue and altruism are
based. >>

The practice of brotherhood (which doesn't seem to be practiced much
these
days) is based on the fact that we can't tell the difference between
one
nondual Monad and any other. In fact, if we assume that there is just
one
Monad, then brotherhood goes out the window and is rendered
meaningless.
But under the assumption that there are countless identical Monads, we
have
a basis for brotherhood and altruism. Virtue is another story and has
nothing to do with Monads.


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

DTB	If so then what does Virtue relate to? Where is it founded?
Does it exist?

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

<< (2)	a sketch of its Evolution is offered and explained.  
 

This just isn't so. The book itself is purported to be Buddhist work,
but
the use of terms like "Lord Svabhava" and so on would never be used by
any
Buddhist. When Blavatsky made her translation of this book into
English, it
is clear to me that she mixed Hinduism in with Buddhist philosophy.
"Seamless" hardly. The missing gaps are the reminders to the reader
that
the whole business is mayavic, which any Buddhist author would be well
aware of. No Buddhist would give credence to a creator-god, so how can
the
Book of Dzyan be Buddhist? 

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

DTB	Both the Buddhist Mahayana and the Hindu Advaita philosophers,
though using different terms discuss the same ideas as I grasp what is
offered.  

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


<< (3)	the Brotherhood of all Religions is described and
demonstrated. Universal symbology is unravelled and the Sciences of
antiquity are made plain. >>

Made plain to whom? To believers, I guess. Certainly not to mainstream
humanity. I find it interesting that while Blavatsky acknowledges the
"brotherhood of all religions" she rips apart Cathoicism and
especially the
Jesuits. She denounces Christian Science and other religions
throughout her
writings. So, where is the brotherhood? What she really says is that
all of
today's religions stem from the ancient Esoteric Tradition that also
produced Theosophy, with the difference being that Theosophy is a
purer
interpretation the others being more or less distorted. There is
absolutely
no way to prove such a thing, and so we have to rely on faith.

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

DTB	I suggest making a study of the foundation texts of the
various Religions and then deciding if there is not adequate
similarity -- in spite of mangling and mistranslating over centuries.
Both ISIS UNVEILED and the SECRET DOCTRINE open this for
consideration. But if they are not studied, then piece-meal opinions
flourish.

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


<< UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD is declared to be a FACT IN NATURE. >>

It is hardly a fact in nature inasmuchas we observe nature's animals
killing each other off right and left eah and every day. It is a
"fact" on
the two highest planes and in Beness, but not in "nature."

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

DTB	Incorrect, It is a one-sided view. Cooperation is also
present and many illustrations of this have been presented in N.
Geographic and NATURE for instance. This view needs revision.

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



These doctrines are pure exotericism and constitute what I have called
Exoteric Theosophy. The underlying assumption here is that a real self
is
reincarnating, is accumulating merit, is subject to its own karma, and
has
7 real principles. This assunption is simply not true. It is a false
assumption, and so any conclusions reached are also false and any Path
tread will get nowhere. I hate to sound so harsh here, but I have to
say it
like I feel it.

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

DTB	Apparently EXOTERICISM mean something t you that I don't
grasp. So your qualification is incomprehensible. However what does
ESOTERICISM say as a contrast ?

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



The Voice of the Silence is very likely an actual Mahayana Buddhist
text.
It denounces, in no uncertain terms, the human mind or manas calling
it
"the slayer of the real" which it is. Any Theosophist who understands
the
Voice will be a Chela in the true sense.

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

DTB AGREED


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


<< "Compassion is the Law of laws, Eternal Harmony. A shoreless
universal essence. The Law of everlasting right and the fitness of
all things The law of Love eternal." >>

The Law of Love is one of our game's rules. Compassion is not a rule,
and
we only need to develop it if we intend to tread a Path. Karma is
another
rule, but so is Chaos. There are many rules. 'The physical body needs
to
breathe air' is just one. There is no such thing as "the law of
everlasting
right." For one thing, what is right and what is wrong changes over
time
and is different between culures and even between families. I see this
almost obsessive need for some kind of universal justice expressed
throughout Theosophy (and in mainstream humanity), and it is sad,
because
there is no such thing. This need is based on false assumptions.

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

DTB	And those are ?

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


<< I am sure there is much in the above that appears "authoritative,"
But I hope that is philosophical and historical aspects may be found
reasonable.

------------------------------------------------------------------


J	Maybe too authoritative. And maybe misplaced? misguided?
misunderstood? I
don't know, but it is not something that I can agree to, for the most
part.
  
Out of respect, I have taken time to respond to your entire post. I
don't
expect you to be overjoyed by my comments. But I do hope you will at
least
think about what I an saying, or trying to say. I am commenting out of
love, and my goal is to help. There is an Esoteric Theosophy. I see
it. I
feel it. I try to live it. It is not well and is barely alive today,
but
with everyone's help it can still be allowed to grow into some kind of
maturity again. That is my wish.

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

DTB	Jerry I appreciate that. We see two things where I see one
and I think we agree on more. Sometimes our terminology defeats us in
the matter of understanding.

Yes, I have learned from you and have been grateful for some of the
directions you opened up for me to look into. 

Thanks good friend for your views. But I wish you would flex a little
to include some I offer, at last the questions that r]probe ever
deeper.

Believe me, I am undaunted by references to "esotericism." They sound
too much like " I have a secret."  

I say if they exist and are TRUE, they are everyone's property. 

I add that if inside of us resides a "ray" (or a speck") of the SPIRIT
OF THE UNIVERSE then the idea of universal Brotherhood embraces not
only the whole of humanity, but every Buddha of whatever antiquity or
stature, and unites us all be we Monads in the chaotic substance of
the formative Universe or the greatest MIND that embraces the UNIVERSE
IN ITS ENTIRE SCOPE --- the ABSOLUTENESS alone KNOWS all. And we are
struggling to gain some perception of what such a stature means. 

Best wishes,

Dal


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

Jerry S.


---