theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: [theosophia] Re: Emerson on Plato

Oct 20, 2004 07:09 PM
by W.Dallas TenBroeck


Oct 20 2004



Re: Belief and Faith.



Dear B:



May I break in here - as it is very interesting.



Belief or faith indicates to me, either proof by logic, intuitive knowledge,
or confidence and trust in the veracity of evidence offered.



It cannot be conveyed to another, in any other way that I know - to provide
absolute certainty -- although the reasons for one's" belief" may be
described. In other words, there is no way that some magnetic transfer can
be made (laying on of hands, apostolic succession, etc .) 



It is always a matter of self consideration and ultimately of self-choice
and decision. It is a self regulated mental action for each one. 



In the matter lf the "Masters of Wisdom," (as I look at it) what parallels
or correspondences do we have?



If we consider the description of the 7-Principles of the Universe and their
reflection in Man's constitution we find that wisdom corresponds to Buddhi,
and that is the pure pellucid receptacle (vehicle) of the SPIRIT - ATMA. 

[S D I 157-8; II 596] 



However we are looking at this from the point of view of our present
brain-minds - more accustomed to the dark avenues and tortuous arguments of
Kama-Manas - the desire-mind -- which, as a goal, seeks its own personal
and isolated "pleasure," rather than the "truth of things." 



This may seem to be too brief a description.



But if we consider that we are able to deal with concepts that have little
or no element of personal "pleasure," or of the comforts of our isolated
personality, we may see that there is a whole range of ideas that are based
on actuality, truth universal, and order. And I will admit that in our
terms we may say there is a "joy" in being able to do this. 



Can we consider that Karma, or the general (and inter-individual) law of
relationships, ruling the Universe and ourselves, has to be meticulously
just, fair, accurate for all beings. Can we safely say: that starting with
the most minute "monad," it is of necessity merciful --- as it is rigid
justice for all, in terms of give and take, and because of the continual and
unavoidable individual responsibility to the WHOLE. 



Then may we not say that in the evolutionary chain of rebirths and
experiences that eventually lead to perfection, any "mind-monad" that
succeeds in purifying itself of personal desires (Kama), (by impersonalizing
and universalizing itself) may attain to the supernal level of wisdom
(Buddhi) that is pure universal knowledge Universal Self-Consciousness? I
would add that this attainment in no way erases its INDIVIDUALITY. In other
words that which is called "Liberation," or "Nirvana" does not a
"disappearance." 



Such individuals may be referred to as Buddhas, Rishis, Avatars, Mahatmas,
etc.they are, one and all, our revered "Elder Brothers." Their Monad and
our Monad are of the same vintage and source, but they have succeeded in
accelerating the "Path" towards "enlightenment" -- a continual access to
wisdom and wise action.



What it does do, as I understand it, is to make available to such an
Individual the capacity to perceive all the causes of karmic involvement,
and thus enable those to be avoided. They are completely impersonal and
have only one great function, and that is of assistance to all those who
"seek to benefit mankind." 



Does this make sense?



Best wishes,



Dallas



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



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill 
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 9:39 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: The Masters of Wisdom





I was making an observation about our behavioral tendencies with regard to
Masters. After all, Christians consider God the Son as the Master who
dwells in heavan at the right hand of God the Father AND in the heart of
every born-again Christian. Dallas' posting of the Judge article is nice,
but it does not negate my observation. Judge says, 



"this article is meant for those who believe in the existence of the
Mahatmas, whether that faith has arisen of itself or is the result of
argument. It is meant also for all classes of the believers, for they are of
several varieties." He specifically calls it a "faith" and goes on to use
the word belief or believe over a dozen times -- at one point saying
pointedly, "We should declare our belief in the Adepts..." If one wishes
to believe in Masters, I am happy for them. Judge goes on to say that "we [I
assume he means theosophists] demand no one's adherence [to our beliefs]." 





Bravo for Judge. However, he is ignoring those who neither believe nor doubt
the existence of Masters of Wisdom. 





Belief and doubt are two sides of a duality. I submit that one cannot
profess a belief without establishing a doubt. 





The doubt may be glossed over or hidden from conscious awareness as we seek
valiantly to exist in only one side of the duality, but a close examination
will reveal doubts inevitable shadow. 





If one claims to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt, one's thought processes
may be more Christian-like than one cares to recognize.



bill





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




[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application