Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00155)

July 9 2004

Dear Pedro:

I have trouble with "belief."  

Over the tears things and opinions have changed radically, so that view
taught to me when I was in school are supplanted by more refined ones. But
since I started my familiarity with Theosophy and its philosophy at about
the same time, and compared those with standard scientific views I find that
the Theosophical one have stood the test of time.

To me "belief" or "faith" implies a "guess," an "opinion," or "a leap of
faith" -- without any knowledge to make it at least plausible. Where are
the laws that have to be in operation is my constant question.

I find the universe is full of laws, and the most disparate things and
events are considered and handled. 

We need only review the history of scientific discoveries over the past 200 

To me, things tend to be harmonious in spite of particular areas of chaos
and disharmony. The wider one is able to view, the more definite is the
harmony -- or "the music of the spheres" as Pythagoras called it. 

Concerning the abnormal phenomena which are considered and explained by
theosophical philosophy, at most we can say we are yet to find out. M So far
everything that has been investigated shows that Nature (as a whole)
contains and coordinates it in some way.

Theosophy speaks of the "astral" as a subsisting support for "physical"
matter, starting from the molecule on up. It is as though special whirls in
electro-magnetic fields at the sub-atomic-molecular level provide the
support for either aggregation or dispersal of forms that become perceptible
to our physical senses. 

If any one of us takes a stand and says: "It happened," or, "It did not
happen." Such a position is only an opinion -- as WE WERE NOT THERE. 

It seems futile to me to try to settle such matters 100, or more years,
after the events took place. 

So, why not say: "Maybe they did." And, to that we can add: "Are there any
comparable events happening these days?"

Further, during the past 100 + years, have such events been reported with
frequency?" 

In any case THEOSOPHY is neither proved nor disproved by psychical
phenomena. Its inherent logic needs study and then analysis can be
attempted in a fair way.

Best wishes,


Dallas



Dallas
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro 
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 11:01 AM
To: 
Subject: The daily conquest of self


--- "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> The following words of HPB (I think) are very
> relevant to what Bart alludes to when he writes:
> 
> ===================================================
> The problem is that, if you base your belief in the 
> concepts that have been promulgated in Blavatsky's
> works 
> and the Mahatma letters on the genuity of the
> phenomena, 
> then any fakery in the latter implies falsehood of
> the 
> former. Except that gets one into a conundrum, as
> the
> former emphasize that acceptance of the concepts 
> should NOT be based on the authority of the writers,
> but 
> on their own merits.
> 
>
======================================================
> 
> But as I have pointed out before, many of the
> concepts
> in Blavatsky's works and the Mahatma Letters deal
> with
> the occult/inner rationale of the phenomena. If
> phenomena
> were faked, does that also indicate that the
> teaching or
> concept about the phenomena and related concepts
> were also faked or 
> madeup or simply borrowed?


The Mahatmas also wrote about the "daily conquest of
self", as illustrated in this passage from KH to
Sinnett: "But what is Self? Only a passing guest,
whose concern are all like a mirage of the great
desert. ..."

Psychic phenomena, by their very nature, can never be
fundamentally real as the word phenomenon (from the
Greek, phainomenon: "what appears") indicates. Their
study may be interesting but is relatively unimportant
in the perspective of the transformation of the human
consciousness.

It may also be important to note that the emphasis on
the "daily conquest of the self" is at the core of the
great spiritual traditions of the world, way before
1888. If it is true that Theosophy itself is at the
heart of those traditions, renunciation of the
personal self (and its attachments, opinions,
self-importance) may as well be one of its fundamental
teachings. In this context, the words of the Buddha in
the Majjima-nikaya are quite pertinent: "The Tathagata
has no views." How can there be universal brotherhood
if MY opinion is more important than someone else's
opinion?


Pedro 





		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


 
Yahoo! Groups Links