Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00759)

Sept 25 2004

Dear John:

The final decider is our Real Selves. We can read many books and mull over
the words used to explain ideas. The Brain-mind likes to do that and spends
hours confusing itself -- doubts arises and ignorance is not dispelled.

Many seek for "Spiritual knowledge." But that is essentially impartial,
impersonal and has an inherent good-will for all. Any touch of selfishness
destroys it. 

I try to simplify, try to get at the basics -- then try to see what this
involved in terms of perception, consciousness, and the will-actins that can
produce harmless spiritual results.  
In this case I use the "7 Principles of Man" as a kind of touchstone. 

Best wishes,

Dallas
 

-----Original Message-----
From: samblo@cs.com [mailto:samblo@cs.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 12:00 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Creating authority under sweet name of
"original teaching"


Dallas,
Thanks for the pointer and your comments, as always. Actually I have 
several versions of The Yoga sutra of Patanjali. the first I acquired was
that of 
Charles Johnson Madam Blavatsky's brother-in-law which I really loved as the

first version. I later acquired several other versions, Dr. J. R. Ballantine
& 
Govind Sastri Deva version, Taimni's, and a commentary on Patanjali Yoga
Sutra 
by Rohit Mehta. I also have at least two other version somewhere on the 
shelves. I have Willain Quan Judge's online version saved in my fovcorite's
and have 
read some but not all of it at present. I consider myself a student with
much 
to learn and have always been eclectic in sourcing material on topics as I 
follow my thread.
Madame Blavatsky reminded the world of the Treasury of Light that is
their 
inheritance and birthright in her selfless effort and sacrifice to author 
from that eternal resource, yet that same resource is self perpetuating and
ever 
projected by the senior function towards us it's recipients, so I, as you
have 
also spite not the gifts of our parents in of the distant past and read
those 
of interest also.
I am apprised of a difference in our view as regards "mind" and we all 
have as a condition of our carnate state various positions on it. I tend to
agree 
with the ancient teaching that "mind" is an acquired and generated
instrument 
that is impermanent when contrasted to the Pure Transcendental Being which 
having never departed and therefore has no necessity of arrival never
possessed 
necessity of mind. I know I encourage reply by posting this but it is my
view 
and I accept others and respect their views as they find them within 
themselves.
I had a pretty good exposure decades ago with the actual positions and 
theory as well as practice of Scientology, then as now I was never a
"Joiner" but 
notwithstanding that I found much there that is on the mark, i developed the

view with substantial basis that they also thoroughly researched and tested 
the teaching of the past, in particular The Yoga Sutra of Patanjali and the 
structure of the Dialectic of the Socratic and Platonic Schools which they
then 
transduced in the "Q's", "Logic's," "Axioms" and other critical technologies

such as the "Quad Flows ( from the Dialectic Structure )," and the data that

they published in "Scientology 0-8 The Book of Basics." 

I have no space between what you look at as "Original Teachings" but also

consider that they are not the cessation of the Veda. The Senior Projective 
Function is ever present and issues from the very Space in which we, veiled
as 
we are by the Conditioned Mind have activity as participants of the One Life

inseparable from that same Space. 

It is agreeably a most interesting perspective as to Buddhi-Manas, but
as 
I understand it is Buddhi itself that is basic to condition of duality and 
consequence Karma, at the Pralaya when all has returned in to Original
Nature 
where is then found Buddhi that acts as the Intermediary Agency between the
Real 
and the Secondary Projective Manifestation?

My best regards and continued wishes for your good health,
John

John 


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



 
Yahoo! Groups Links