Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00222)

Sept 6 2004



QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS



Dear Steve:



I am not sure I understand what you mean to say. However, I think this is
serous stuff. 



Arguments are many - so are "threads." What is valuable to maintain, or to
continue?



But what about seeking principles all can rely on? Then debate becomes
unified. 



What is "self-trust" ? Do you mean honesty to your self? If so you imply
two selves: one Honest, and the other sly, deceitful and dishonest. Is
there some other kind of "self?" 



Do you not also mean honesty for (and to) all? How about HONESTY ALL THE
TIME? Do we fear something? 



If we are afraid, then we are ignorant in that area. How do we change that?
And, should we change that for ourselves? 



I wonder if this relates to the Two Selves in man? 



Does this equate to "the Self of Spirit? - or the "Heart Doctrine," and to
the "self of Matter?" -- or the "Eye Doctrine?" [Voice]



>From the point of view of the average person who uses the selfish and
isolationist point of view, I can see this makes little or no sense at all.
And as a consideration it will be rejected because his "selfishness" is seen
to be discounted almost entirely. It may even be considered a waste of
time. 



But is it? In the long run who "wins?" the honest or the dishonest person?



Curious but I have noticed that those who are dishonest always pretend to be
honest. Why? Is there some special power in virtue? 



You also imply (as I see it) that there is another position - it is one of a
kind of judge - a place from which the onlooker sees both clearly -- and
distinguishes between them. Now that is important. 



To me it implies there is a dispassionate observer that can see both Law and
lawlessness. But if there is going to be argument about Law or non-law
(chaos) inn our environment, we will also get nowhere. 



I think this is unreasonable, for the plain fact is: we depend for our
organized and continued life on the accurate and impersonal operations of
Nature -- and that surrounds us all, and, we notice that left alone,
Nature RUNS BY EXACT LAWS. (I mean: chemistry, physics, biology, etc.,
those powers and operations innate in all substances that sustain in each of
us our own life-environment. 



But I see you may be trying to introduce the matter of introspection,
reflection and self-evaluation. In other words, are there any MORAL LAWS in
community and family relations that are sufficiently universal and impartial
as to be considered operative and valid? Can we detect them? Can we isolate
and define them?



Does this not start with an evaluation on agreed definitions -- on subjects
like: Ego, Lower and Higher Self, likes, dislikes, knowledge, folly and
indifference, desires, yens, emotions, passions, etc. All the many variables
of "human character" and "human emotion '? Unless these are brought
together and well defined, we will tie ourselves in the proverbial knots of
unceasing argument.



It is my opinion that THEOSOPHY provides us with some simple guide lines.



1 There is an immortal Monad that serves as an immutable center for
the recording of all experience. Can this be demonstrated?



2 The progress of each of these is a kind of pilgrimage, and many
lives are needed to acquire the plenitude of information that this actually
WISDOM. Reincarnation is a fact. Is there any evidence for this?



3 Experience may be mental, psychic (emotional), and physical.
Possibly there are other types of evidence, but can they be classified
accurately? Can we set up a relevant and useful table (which all can use)
on which to do this?



4 There are in the Universe "vices and virtues" that have been well
defined and serve as "norms." Like touchstones they can be made to test the
value of any thought or feeling that can be measured by comparison with
them. Lets set up a list and establish what those norms are. 



5 Is this an aspect of Universal LAW, and also of "Karma" - as the
Universe (environment), THEOSOPHY says, reacts to every choice we make
individually. Its attention and minute sensitivity is triggered by the
moral quality (motive) of our thoughts, feelings and deeds. [In this
THEOSOPHY considers that the Universe exists as a "level field" for the
advancement of all its many levels and kinds of components "monads and their
aggregated forms." To believe that it is ruled by coincidence, happenstance,
and is chancy or chaotic, is not part of our more universal experience.
What kind of experience shall we admit as useful to our study?] 



6 If agreed on the basis for a universal ethic -- a general
morality can be defined. [It is my observation that the statutory laws of
every country or the "bill of Rights," does this, and most countries agree.
So why not place this as a consensus and criterion for comparison?]



7 If we desire to "fall back on our judgment;" then lets make sure
that our ability to decide is established on a sound ground that is the same
for everyone. No "favourites," and, No "escapes" from the effects of
decisions we make. [ The priests of religions have built their claims on
this kind of thing. And this includes a special pipe-line to God (Wow !!)
to secure such anomalies and irregularities of the LAW. How can we trust a
"God" who does that? ]



Well those are a few ideas - see what you think of them.



Also, I in no way suggest taking the writings of HPB or Judge, or anyone
else, as a criterion or an "authority." They did not recommend that. 



In fact they came as "messengers" from the Great Ancient Lodge of the
masters of Wisdom - Those who made the grade - the transition from "men-of
doubtful minds," to "super-men of mind complete." And, they wish to share
and show the "Way" - the "Path" - as have done all the Avatars, Buddhas, and
Teachers of yore. THEOSOPHY dates back to the beginnings of history. The
SECRET DOCTRINE speaks of those times and describes them. 



We are compelled to do nothing, but it is suggested we read, study and
decide - and on this we are entirely free and, we are told to rely solely on
our own judgment.



The information is free, the work to assimilate and test it is ours. 



How many (in the past 125 years and today) have actually buckled down and
read the SECRET DOCTRINE, or ISIS UNVEILED, or HPB's articles all the way
through? Do we know what THEOSOPHY is?



What is the basis being used by any one for questions, arguments, etc.



Are we earnest students, or -- carping critics? 





Best wishes, 



Dallas



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



-----Original Message-----
From: Steven L
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 7:41 AM
To: 
Subject: Serious Questions with Profound Implications



Dal-



Thanks for bringing this excerpt forward. i think it reveals a 
situation in our lives as students, which needs to be addressed from
different points of view.




I am speaking to the issue of self-trust regarding how we see the
writings from other persons points of view.




In particular to Adelasie, there is a thread of reason which runs through
the writings of both Judge and HPB, which I am not implying should not be
questioned, but that "thread" is not different from the line of connective
and reasonable thought we use when conversing carefully our fellows. 



Therefore when another representation or implication about Judge or HPB has
been presented to us, we need to 
be able to fall back on ourselves and trust our own intuitions. 




Otherwise we shall be blown around by the winds of other's doubts or simply
odd motives. There is nothing, and I repeat, nothing another can say to
alleviate our own doubts, regarding these things.

Steve
CUT



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]