Theos-Talk Archives (December 2004 Message tt00303)

Hi,

 

Well it would be quite selfish to refuse to give blood for someone because of karmic consequences. The very refusal has already generated a karma. Of course in occultism it seems that there are reasons for some to refuse to do so. But when we have members of our family that needs help, there is no doubt that such help has to be supplied. I donated blood many times, for persons that I know and also for members of my family. And I have no problem with that as I believe the worst "sin" would be to refuse to do so. But I don't know how I would react in the case I would need blood.

 

Of course when I die I am not planning to donate all my organs but to be cremated, even if I know that so many people need organs to go on in life. I am not against organ donation and maybe if someone close to me would need probably I would donate. I think such matters as blood transfusion and organdonations are of extremely personal nature and personal decisions about such matters should be respected.

 

Erica

 


Perry Coles <perrycoles@yahoo.com> wrote:


Hello Cass,
I agree life if full of risks and challenges.
The thing I find is there are usually so many ways of looking at the
same thing.
Depending on which angle you come at it from, your own background
experience and past conditioning.
Every action according to theosophical teachings has an effect and the
nature of that effect is determined by the motives and intentions of
the act.
The overriding ethic in this situation is would I allow a child loved
one or myself to die because of refusing a blood transfusion for me
the answer is an instant and clear no way!
There will be effects from that choice.
There no doubt may be some `negative' effects but I am sure many
positive as well.
Aren't most of our choices a mixture of both anyway.

Regards 

Perry




--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva wrote:
> Dear Perry
> I am starting to think that we have replaced the fear of hell with
the fear of bad karma?
> Cass
> 
> Perry Coles 
wrote:
> 
> 
> Dear Dallas and All,
> If `Compassion is the Law of Laws' then surely this can be act of
> compassion which will have its own karmic effects based on motive as
> you've said.
> 
> I have seen programs on people who have received organ donations and
> then have taken on some of the attributes of that person so what you
> say is defiantly not without merit and worthy of serious consideration.
> (there was an excellent program on Discovery channel on this)
> 
> However for me I feel the act of giving of oneself for the sake of
> another is a selfless and compassionate act.
> 
> While the taking of blood or an organ may have a `negative' effect on
> us to a greater or lesser degree I cant believe that the underling
> skandas we've acquired over perhaps hundreds of lifetimes will be
> totally over

run by the life saving organ or especially blood transfusion.
> 
> If we all of a sudden get a taste for rap music or MacDonald's, well
> so be it I am still the same person underneath.
> And have been given an extra opportunity to work though karma and
> hopefully be of service to others in some way.
> If we only look at a negative then that's all we'll see.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Perry
> 
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "W.Dallas TenBroeck"
> wrote:
> > Dec. 20 2004
> > 
> > Re: Blood Transfusions, Organ donations, etc.
> > Transfusions and reincarnation
> > 
> > Dear Perry:
> > 
> > The application of technical medical processes is one thing. The
motive
> > behind the application is another.
> > 
> > The processes of asepsis in hospitals and clinics are well known
but not
> > always applied meticulously. 
> > 
> > But who knows the effect of the moral contagions inherent in
> another's body
> > as a result of their life and karma? If and when this (a portion of
> > another's Karma) is injected or introduced into another living body, a
> > portion of the Karma comes along with the physical blood or organ 
> There are
> > enough cases on record of the subsequent feelings and problems
that have
> > been found to be consequent on the use of these processes. 
> > 
> > THEOSOPHY deals with laws and explanations and observations
> impartially. 
> > 
> > It shows the astral structures and the "pranic-life currents" 
> underlie the
> > physical organs, blood and other structures. It says they impart
> their own
> > imprint in terms of life-memories and strengths (or weaknesses)
wherever
> > they go. The physical blood or organ conveys them. They are also
> conveyed
> > by massage, and acupressure for instance, and above all by the
inner and
> > powerful WILL of the doctor, nurse massager or practitioner. 
> > 
> > The blood or organs of another person, no matter how closely
> related, are
> > different from ours. 
> > 
> > THEOSOPHY does not recommend such exchanges. I know this seems to
> violate
> > current rules and attitudes. Next question is WHY ?
> > 
> > How we make application is another thing altogether, as the moral
> aspect is
> > involved and Karma is formed there, based on motive always.
> > 
> > Lets ask another question. If THEOSOPHY is right in this, what
> effect has
> > such an exchange on the karma of the two Egos involved -- for their
> future
> > in their present life, and in a future life upon reincarnation ? Is
> this
> > intimate relationship continued and desirable? What will be the
> karma of
> > those who facilitate or participate in these processes? Is that not
> to be
> > thought of? 
> > 
> > I know this all sound vague and fuzzy, but that is because the
> matter is yet
> > to be seized and made a part of investigation. Who believes in
> > reincarnation anyway? The Chinese systems of the meridians in the
body,
> > whereon is built their system of acupuncture and acupressure; the
> Indian
> > Ayurvedic lore is well aware of bodily meridians and interlinks, and
> > practice here in the West of several kinds including Chiropractic is
> also
> > built on this knowledge. Who has made a systematic investigation of
> these
> > systems and ancient knowledge? 
> > 
> > No one "likes" fire to burn, or water to "drown." However, if
> misused they
> > do that impartially and without malice.
> > 
> > None of us are yet able to determine the future of another, in
this or a
> > future body.. If however we can use and apply the best techniques
> to save
> > life we do that with the motive of assistance.
> > 
> > As for myself, (not a child) I have given strict instructions that
> no blood
> > transfusions are to be made in case I need them medically, nor are any
> > "heroic measures" to keep the body "alive" are to be used in case of
> coma or
> > other determination of the passing away of consciousness. I do this in
> > advance of any situation where I might be unable to assure medical
> or legal
> > authorities that it is my desire to let my body die if it cannot
> heal and
> > revive itself . But I am an adult, and, taking full
> responsibility, I can
> > decide for myself what I will accept or not as treatment for my body.
> > 
> > It is quite ridiculous to fear death. We don't fear sleeping, do
> we? And
> > who is to say that our consciousness will return on awakening to the
> same
> > body? In case of continued wakefulness under forced sleep
> deprivation it
> > has been demonstrated that eventually these cause sleep or death. 
> > 
> > But to decide for a child -- that is a matter for parents to
consider as
> > they have that duty, under Karma. I know this is an "open door." 
> But again
> > THEOSOPHY does not dogmatize for specific cases It says in effect: Use
> > your common sense. Discover the Principles that are operative in
> all cases,
> > and apply them. 
> > 
> > In these days, to maintain a sure and fearless belief in
> reincarnation is
> > rare. But then, who has yet seen or discussed the matter with the
> REAL INNER
> > SPIRIT of any man or woman so far ? [ Or even in meditation with
> one's own
> > Inner SELF ? Only THEOSOPHY speaks of this, and indicates ways in
> which it
> > may be done.] 
> > 
> > No, our sole knowledge is that the INNER SPIRIT, our Real Self,
requires
> > specifically a continuity in a single body; and its condition,
before or
> > after the death of that present body, is quite unknown and
unprovable so
> > far. Current beliefs state that the body and the indwelling SPIRIT
> are the
> > same thing. But are they? 
> > 
> > No, THEOSOPHY does not dogmatize, but it does offer the rules and
> facts of
> > life, as it know it too be.
> > 
> > Dal
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Dallas
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Perry Coles [mailto:perrycoles@y...] 
> > Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2004 4:47 PM
> > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Theos-World Re: [bn-study] help needed
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Dallas,
> > 
> > I hope your well ,
> > 
> > As with all things we as individuals need to try and use wise
> > discernment and certainly when it comes to ourselves our choices are
> > our own based on our knowledge and understanding of occult principles.
> > 
> > But when it comes to children who lives could have been saved by a
> > blood transfusion, I simply find it outrageous that these children
> > have been allowed to die over a discission made by the parents because
> > of the blind following of dogma.
> > 
> > I hope no theosophical student would ever follow any theosophical
> > statement blindly no matter who wrote it.
> > 
> > Theosophical study is one as you know that takes lifetimes of work and
> > is not meant to be followed blindly but rather Self realised.
> > The information may or may not be correct we can never presume that it
> > is correct especially if a persons life other than our own hangs in
> > the balance.
> > What we choose for ourselves is another matter.
> > 
> > Sorry to hear you've been in hospital hope alls ok!
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Perry
> > 
> > 
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "W.Dallas TenBroeck"
> > wrote:
> > > Dec 19 2004
> > > 
> > > Dear Perry:
> > > 
> > > What you say is correct and reflects the current medical view.
> > > 
> > > They know nothing of Occultism.
> > > 
> > > Preserving life in an old, decrepit and almost useless body is
> > ridiculous in
> > > the face of individual immortality and reincarnation -- which are
> > spoofed at
> > > by present day materialism in medicine and even law.
> > > 
> > > Let me put it this way: THEOSOPHY teaches a number of things that
> > > materialism currently does not know anything about. That does
not make
> > > THEOSOPHY either dogmatic or wrong. 
> > > 
> > > But it ought to encourage deeper research.
> > > 
> > > The application of knowledge is always left to the one who provides
> > it. The
> > > motive for providing it is the desideratum of Karma.
> > > 
> > > In THEOSOPHY ethics and morals are everything. Science does not yet
> > accept
> > > those. 
> > > 
> > > So it is up to us to use or not use.
> > > 
> > > Dallas
> > > 
> > > ============================
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Perry Coles [mailto:perrycoles@y...] 
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 7:50 PM
> > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Theos-World Re: [bn-study] help needed
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hello Dallas,
> > > I was a little concerned over your comments on blood
transfusions and
> > > organ donations.
> > > As an ex JW I know the needless and pointless suffering and waste of
> > > life that can result from these type of dogmatic beliefs.
> > > 
> > > The ethical dimension to this is to me not just a matter of our
> > > attachment to the body and/or the occult effects of having someone
> > > else's blood in our veins but if we are able to extend our life
though
> > > either a blood transfusion or organ donation are we not duty
bound to
> > > use whatever means we can to either save someone else's
> > > (especially!!!) life or our own as long as it is not at the cost of
> > > another's?
> > > 
> > > The occult consequences of these procedures while perhaps coming
at a
> > > price may be far outweighed by the good we can do while in
> incarnation.
> > > 
> > > Perry
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "W.Dallas TenBroeck"
> > > wrote:
> > > > Dec 18 2004
> > > > 
> > > > Dear Vera:
> > > > 
> > > > You asked: about blood transfusion and organ donations - does
> > THEOSOPHY
> > > > offer anything.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > THEOSOPHY does not recommend either of these for the reason
that the
> > > astral
> > > > body and Karma attached to those are always incompatible and
> > > dangerous to
> > > > some extent. 
> > > > 
> > > > Physical medicine and the science of modern healing look on the
> > > human body
> > > > as a fairly adaptable series if interchangeable parts - which is
> > > not so.
> > > > 
> > > > The Universe organizes through the astral body each person with
> > > their own
> > > > particular set of personalized and individual organs and
substances.
> > > These
> > > > are always related to the individual's Karma. 
> > > > 
> > > > To some extent Medical science recognizes incompatibilities
such as
> > > in blood
> > > > transfusions and the compatibility (by DNA testing) of proposed
> organ
> > > > transplants (heart, lungs, etc. ) and cures for cancer attacked
> > > parts of the
> > > > body. 
> > > > 
> > > > One of our problems is psychological: Most fear death. Those who
> > > have had
> > > > NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCES ( NDE ) have lost such fear as they
> > realize that
> > > > they as SPIRITUAL SOULS survive physical death. Med. Sc. Tries to
> > > preserve
> > > > "life"-- at any cost, in the most shattered of physical bodies.
> > > > 
> > > > THEOSOPHY states all bodies are replaceable under nature's
rules and
> > > laws.
> > > > And while everyone grieves for the loss of a loved one, There
is the
> > > > knowledge that under Karma we will all meet again, and love and
> > live and
> > > > work together, in the future. [ For example, we don't grieve when
> > > one goes
> > > > to sleep before another does? We know that we will wake up and
> > continue
> > > > life in a fresh day. It is so with the larger separation of
> > "death." ]
> > > > 
> > > > I attach here an article written generally on this. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > THE CURE OF DISEASES
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > MORTAL ills and the needs of the stomach rank next after the
> > instinct of
> > > > self-preservation among all the subjects which engage the
attention
> > > of the
> > > > race. 
> > > > If we do not go on living we cannot do the work we think there
is to
> > > do; if
> > > > we remain hungry we will lose the power to work properly or to
> > > enjoy, and at
> > > > last come to the door of death. From bad or scanty food follows a
> > > train of
> > > > physical ills called generally disease. 
> > > > 
> > > > Disease reaches us also through too much food. So in every
direction
> > > these
> > > > ills attack us; even when our feeding is correct and sufficient it
> > > is found
> > > > that we fall a prey because our Karma, settled by ourselves is
some
> > > previous
> > > > life, ordains that we enter on this one handicapped by the
> > > hereditary taint
> > > > due to the wickedness or the errors of our fathers and mothers. 
> > > > 
> > > > And the records of science show that the taint in the blood or the
> > > lymph may
> > > > jump over many lives, attacking with virulence some generation
> > > distant very
> > > > far from the source. 
> > > > 
> > > > What wonder, then that the cure of disease is an all-absorbing
> > > subject with
> > > > every one! The Christian knows that it is decreed by Almighty God
> > > that He
> > > > will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children even to the
> > > third and
> > > > fourth generation, and the non-believer sees that by some power in
> > > nature
> > > > the penalty is felt even so far.
> > > > 
> > > > All of this has given to the schools of mental and so-called
> > > "metaphysical"
> > > > healing a strong pull on the fears, the feelings, the wishes, and
> > > the bodies
> > > > of those to whom they address themselves, and especially in the
> United
> > > > States. 
> > > > That there is more attention given to the subject in America seems
> > > true to
> > > > those who have been on the other side of the Atlantic and noticed
> > > how small
> > > > is the proportion of people there who know anything about the
> > > subject. But
> > > > in the United States in every town many can be found who know
about
> > > these
> > > > schools and practice after their methods. Why it has more hold
here
> > > can be
> > > > left to conjecture, as the point under consideration is why it has
> > > any hold
> > > > at all. It is something like patent medicine. 
> > > > 
> > > > Offer a cure to people for their many ills, and they will take it
> > > up; offer
> > > > it cheap, and they will use it; offer it as an easy method,
and they
> > > will
> > > > rush for it under certain conditions. 
> > > > 
> > > > Metaphysical healing is easy for some because it declares, first,
> > > that no
> > > > money need be paid to doctors for medicine; second, that medical
> > > fluids and
> > > > drugs may be dispensed with; and third that it is easily
learned and
> > > > practiced. The difficulties that arise out of the necessities of
> > > logic are
> > > > not present for those who never studied it, but are somewhat
> > potent with
> > > > those who reason correctly; - but that is not usual for the
general
> > > run of
> > > > minds. 
> > > > 
> > > > They see certain effects and accept the assumed cause as the right
> > > one. But
> > > > many persons will not even investigate the system, because they
> > think it
> > > > requires them to postulate the non-existence of that which
they see
> > > before
> > > > their eyes. 
> > > > 
> > > > The statements quoted from the monthly Christian Science in March
> > > PATH are
> > > > bars in the way of such minds. If they could be induced to just
> > try the
> > > > method offered for cure, belief might result, for effects indeed
> often
> > > > follow. 
> > > > 
> > > > But the popular mind is not in favor of "mind cure," and more
> > > prominence is
> > > > given in the daily papers to cases of death under it than to
cures.
> > > And very
> > > > full reports always appear of a case such as one in March, where
> > "faith
> > > > curers," in order to restore life, went to praying over the dead
> > > body of one
> > > > of the members of a believing family.
> > > > 
> > > > During a recent tour over this country from the Atlantic to the
> > > Pacific and
> > > > back, I had the opportunity of meeting hundreds of disciples of
> these
> > > > schools, and found in nearly all cases that they were not addicted
> > > to logic
> > > > but calmly ignored very plain propositions, satisfied that if
> > cures were
> > > > accomplished the cause claimed must be the right one, and almost
> > without
> > > > exception they denied the existence of evil or pain or suffering. 
> > > > 
> > > > There was a concurrence of testimony from all to show that the
> > > dominant idea
> > > > in their minds was the cure of their bodily ills and the
> > continuance of
> > > > health. The accent was not on the beauty of holiness or the
value to
> > > them
> > > > and the community of a right moral system and right life, but
on the
> > > cure of
> > > > their diseases. 
> > > > 
> > > > So the conclusion has been forced home that all these schools
exist
> > > because
> > > > people desire to be well more than they desire to be good,
although
> > > they do
> > > > not object to goodness if that shall bring wholeness.
> > > > 
> > > > And, indeed, one does not have to be good to gain the benefit
of the
> > > > teachings. It is enough to have confidence, to assert boldly that
> > > this does
> > > > not exist and that that has no power to hurt one. 
> > > > I do not say the teachers of the "science" agree with me
herein, but
> > > only
> > > > that whether you are good or bad the results will follow the firm
> > > practice
> > > > of the method enjoined, irrespective of the ideas of the teachers.
> > > > 
> > > > For in pure mind-cure as compared with its congener "Christian
> > > Science," you
> > > > do not have to believe in Jesus and the gospels, yet the same
> > > results are
> > > > claimed, for Jesus taught that whatever you prayed for with faith,
> > > that you
> > > > should have.
> > > > 
> > > > Scientific research discloses that the bodies of our race are
> > > infected with
> > > > taints that cause nearly all of our diseases, and school after
> > school of
> > > > medicine has tried and still tries to find the remedy that will
> > > dislodge the
> > > > foulness in the blood. 
> > > > 
> > > > This is scientific, since it seeks the real physical cause;
> > metaphysical
> > > > healing says it cures, but cannot prove that the cause is
destroyed
> > > and not
> > > > merely palliated. 
> > > > 
> > > > That there is some room for doubt history shows us, for none will
> > > deny that
> > > > many pure thinking and acting pair have brought forth children who
> > > displayed
> > > > some taint derived from a distant ancestor. Evidently their pure
> > > individual
> > > > thoughts had no power over the great universal development of the
> > matter
> > > > used by those human bodies.
> > > > 
> > > > Turning now to medicine we find the Italian Count Mattei
> > promulgating a
> > > > system of cure by the homeopathic use of subtle vegetable essences
> > > which may
> > > > well give pause to those who would make universal the curing by
> > faith or
> > > > mind alone. Some of his liquids will instantly stop a violent
pain,
> > > restore
> > > > sight, give back hearing, and dissipate abnormal growths. His
> > > globules will
> > > > make a drunken man sober, and, given to the nurse who suckles a
> > > babe, will
> > > > cure the child who takes the milk. The drunkard and the child
do not
> > > think
> > > > about or have faith in the remedies, yet they cure. Is it not
> > better to
> > > > restore health by physical means and leave the high teachings
of the
> > > > healers, all taken from well know sources, for the benefit of our
> > moral
> > > > nature? 
> > > > 
> > > > And if Christian healers read these lines, should they not
> > remember that
> > > > when the prophet restored the widow's son he used physical means -
> > > his own
> > > > magnetism applied simultaneously to every member of the child's
> > > body, and
> > > > Jesus, when the woman who touched his garment was cured, lost a
> > > portion of
> > > > his vitality - not his thoughts - for he said "virtue" had gone
> > out from
> > > > him? 
> > > > The Apostle also gave directions that if any were sick the others
> > should
> > > > assemble about the bed and anoint with oil, laying on their hands
> > > meanwhile:
> > > > simply physical therapeutics following a long line of ancient
> > precedent
> > > > dating back to Noah. 
> > > > 
> > > > Moses taught how to cure diseases and to disinfect places where
> > > contagion
> > > > lurked. It was not by using the high power of thought, but by
> > processes
> > > > deemed by him to be effectual, such as sprinkling blood of animals
> > > > slaughtered in peculiar circumstances. 
> > > > 
> > > > Without declaring for or against his methods, it is very certain
> 
> === message truncated ===
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! – Try it today! 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






Yahoo! Groups Links









Erica Letzerich .'.






__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

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