Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00229)

Jan 10 2004

Dear Cass:

Literal and implied meanings are always going to trouble us.

"To say that the Absolute Consciousness is "unconscious" of its
consciousness (hence to the limited intellect of man must be "Absolute
Unconsciousness") seems like speaking of a square triangle. We hope to
develop the proposition more fully in one of the forthcoming numbers of
"Fragments of Occult Truth," of which we may publish a series. We will then
prove, perhaps, to the satisfaction of the non-prejudiced that the Absolute,
or the Unconditioned, and (especially) the Unrelated, is a mere fanciful
abstraction, a fiction, unless we view it from the standpoint, and in the
light of, the more educated pantheist. 

To do so, we will have to regard the Absolute merely as the aggregate of all
intelligences, the totality of all existences, incapable of manifesting
itself except through the interrelationship of its parts, as it is
absolutely incognizable and non-existent outside its phenomena. and depends
entirely on its ever-correlating forces, dependent in their turn on the One
Great Law."

HPB wrote this in 1882 in THEOSOPHIST as a footnote to ARE DREAMS but IDLE
VISIONS ? To me it illustrates the problem we all have of securing accurate
meanings from each other.

Also:

ABSOLUTE DIVINE MIND -- CONSCIOUSNESS


"...during Pralayas...there is nothing to receive and reflect the ideation
of the Absolute Mind; therefore it is not. Everything outside the Absolute
and immutable Sat (Be-ness), is necessarily finite and conditioned, since it
has beginning and end...A distinction had to be made between the Absolute
Mind, which is ever present, and its reflection and manifestation in the 
Ah-hi [Dhyan Chohans], who being on the highest plane, reflect the universal
mind collectively at the first flutter of Manvantara. After which they
begin the work of evolution of all the lower forces throughout the seven
planes, down to the lowest--our own. The Ah-hi are the primordial seven
rays, or Logoi, emanated from the first Logos, triple, yet one in essence."
Trans. 19-20


"Universal or Absolute Mind always is during Pralaya as well as Manvantara;
it is immutable. The Ah-hi are the highest Dhyanis, the Logoi...During
Pralaya there are no Ah-hi, because they come into being only with the first
radiation of the Universal Mind, which, per se, cannot be differentiated,
and the radiation from which is the first dawn of Manvantara. The Absolute
is dormant, latent mind, and cannot be otherwise in true metaphysical
perception; it is only Its shadow which becomes differentiated in the
collectivity of these Dhyanis...It is absolute consciousness eternally,
which consciousness becomes relative consciousness periodically, at every
"Manvantaric dawn." Trans. 20


"The Divine Mind is, and must be, before differentiation takes place. It is
called the divine Ideation, which is eternal in its Potentiality and
periodical in its Potency, when it becomes Mahat, Anima Mundi or Universal
Soul."	Trans. p. 4


"...Mahat--the great Manvantaric Principle of Intelligence--acts as a Brain
through which the Universal and Eternal Mind radiates the Ah-hi,
representing the resultant Consciousness or ideation. As the shadow of this
primordial triangle falls lower and lower through the descending planes, it
becomes with every stage more material."	Trans. 28


"Apart from Cosmic Substance, Cosmic Ideation could not manifest as
individual consciousness, since it is only through a vehicle of matter that
consciousness wells up as "I am I," a physical basis being necessary to
focus a ray of the Universal Mind at a certain stage of complexity. Again,
apart from Cosmic Ideation, Cosmic Substance would remain an empty
abstraction, and no emergence of consciousness could ensue. The "manifested
Universe," therefore is pervaded by duality, which is, as it were, the very
essence of its ex-istence as "manifestation."...subject and object, spirit
and matter, are but aspects of the One Unity in which they are synthesized
so, in the manifested Universe, there is "that" which links spirit to
matter, subject to object...Fohat...is thus the dynamic energy of Cosmic
Ideation...the intelligent medium, the guiding power of all manifestation,
the "Thought Divine" transmitted and made manifest through the Dhyan
Chohans, the Architects of the visible World. Thus from Spirit, or Cosmic
Ideation, comes our consciousness; from Cosmic Substance the several
vehicles in which that consciousness is individualized and attains to
self--or reflective--consciousness; while Fohat, in its various
manifestations, is the mysterious link between Mind and Matter, the
animating principle electrifying every atom to life."	S D I
15-16


COSMIC MIND [ IN MANIFESTATION ]


"...cosmic mind appears at the third stage, or degree, and is confined or
limited to the manifested universe...Cosmic Mind is Mahat, or divine
ideation in active (creative) operation, and thus only the periodical
manifestation in time and in actu, of the Eternal Universal Mind--in
potentia. In strict truth, Universal Mind, being only another name for the
Absolute, out of time and space, this Cosmic Ideation, or Mind, is not an
evolution at all (least of all a :creation"), but simply one of the aspects
of the former [ABSOLUTE], which knows no change, which ever was, which is,
and will be...Universal Mind is not the same thing [as Cosmic Mind], as no
conditioned and relative act can be predicted of that which is Absolute.
Universal ideation was as soon as the Ah-hi appeared, and continues
throughout the Manvantara." [The Ah-hi] belong to the first, second, and
third planes--the last plane being really the starting point of the
primordial manifestation--the objective reflection of the unmanifested.
Like the Pythagorean Monas, the first Logos, having emanated the first
triad, disappears into silence and darkness."	Trans. 23


"It is most misleading to apply mechanical laws to the higher metaphysics of
cosmogony, or to space and time, as we know them, for neither existed then.
The reflection of the triad in space and time, or the objective universe,
comes later."	Trans. 23


"...Mahat--the great Manvantaric Principle of Intelligence--acts as a Brain
through which the Universal and Eternal Mind radiates the Ah-hi,
representing the resultant Consciousness or ideation. As the shadow of this
primordial triangle falls lower and lower through the descending planes, it
becomes with every stage more material."	Trans. 28

"[THAT]...is the Vedantic Mulaprakriti, and the Svabhavat of the Buddhists,
or that androgynous something...which is both differentiated and
undifferentiated. In its first principle it is a pure abstraction, which
becomes differentiated only when it is transformed, in a process of time,
into Prakriti. If compared with the human principles, it corresponds to
Buddhi, while Atma would correspond to Parabrahm, Manas to Mahat, and so
on."	Transactions . p. 4


THE ABSOLUTE -- SPACE -- BE-NESS


"Space exists where there is nothing else, and must so exist whether the
Universe is one absolute vacuum or a full Plenum...Space is what the
ancients called the One invisible and unknown (now unknowable) Deity. "
Trans. 12

"The absoluteness of the all-containing One essence, has to manifest itself
equally in rest and activity."	Trans 11

The Absolute is "the eternal divine Consciousness." Trans. 16
	
"...the Absolute, which is to us, at our present stage of mental
development, merely a logical speculation, though dating back to thousands
and thousands of years."	Trans. 21

"The Absolute cannot be said to have a consciousness...such as we have
here. It has neither consciousness, nor desire, nor wish, nor thought,
because it is absolute thought, absolute desire, absolute consciousness,
absolute "all." Trans. 17


"How can the Absolute be said to feel ? The Absolute can have no condition
nor attribute."	Trans. 25


"Be-ness"...SAT. It is not existence, for existence can only apply to
phenomena, never to noumena...Existence...implies something having a
beginning and an end. [ ex-istence cannot]...be applied to that which ever
was, and of which it cannot be predicated that it ever issued from something
else."	Trans 17


"Be-ness" is not being, for it is equally non-being. We cannot conceive of
it, for our intellects are finite and our language far more limited and
conditioned even than our minds. How...can we express that which we can
only conceive of by a series of negatives?"	Trans. 17

I wonder if this will help?

Getting the blur of another's idea is important If as in THEOSOPHY there is
a very definite system of doctrine (The UNIVERSE IS ALIVE and includes
everything, Each Human is an immortal, 3 Fundamentals, 7 Principles, Karma,
Reincarnation) there ought not to be too much trouble translating from one
to another. It is when the fundamental ideas are not well known, or where
modern science, religious unprovable dogmas, or education have erected false
barriers, that there is trouble in communicating.

-- HPB wrote: 

"ENQUIRER. How, then, should Theosophical principles be applied so that
social co-operation may be promoted and true efforts for social amelioration
be carried on? 
 
THEOSOPHIST. Let me briefly remind you what these principles are --
universal Unity and Causation; Human Solidarity; the Law of Karma;
Re-incarnation. These are the four links of the golden chain which should
bind humanity into one family, one universal Brotherhood." Key, p. 233

Best wishes, 

Dallas
 

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Cass S
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 1:35 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: A Question for the New Year


Here this

Cass

 
No, I was speaking about terms not being taken in a direct literal
sense but instead making an attempt at understanding what is trying
to be conveyed. 


To grasp a concept that lies beyond the literal word. I have no issue with
the use of the word THAT in what you had stated. I understand the meaning
behind it's usage. The same consideration can be taken in my usage of the
word "view".

I was replying to the comments made of it's usage :

"There is no such THING as THE Absolute. So how can we talk about it
viewing or being viewed?"

This seems to be an example of not attempting to look and understand
of what was trying to be conveyed, but taking a literal definition and 
meaning of a term in which was not meant in the communication. One can speak
in a manner of a metaphor and another condemn the usage of the words 
because of taking the words in a direct literal sense instead of the meaning

behind the words in which was trying to be conveyed. 

If one does not understand what one is attempting to communicate, then
one can ask what is meant, as this would be a response given in the 
spirit of communication and sharing.

Individuals have different modes and ways of communicating and manners
of speaking. I can not say I understand them all. Miscommunication and
misunderstandings can occur. Askance versus assumption can be a
method of maintaining more clarity when engaging in communication
with another.