Brmhan word is not used much by CWL. In some old works Bramhan means
God. In meditation we don't concentrate on Ego. It is said that
consciousness or Monad is on Monadic plane which above Atmic plane.
So if in your terminology Atma=Bramhan=Consciousness=Self, then you
may concentrate on Atma(to express it in your terminology)
See, when consciousness withdraws from external things in all lower
planes like astral, mental, physical then what remains ? Then
consciousness focusses on itself. Supposing that you are discussing
with ten people in your room and TV is on. You are aware of things in
physical plane. Now all of these people go out, you turn off TV,
lights and music. Then you are aware of your own thoughts and
emotions. So you have withdrawn to some extent focus of attention
from physical plane. Similarly it should withdraw from all lower
planes below Monadic plane.
Anand Gholap
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-
theosophy@s...> wrote:
Hallo Anand,
But Anand I think I was referring to the fact that Atma = Brahman,
and that to meditate on Brahman would be to meditate upon ones
inner self.
So I ask again would it be allright to meditate upon Atma - or
Brahman
or is it absolutely required as so very important to meditate upon
the Ego -
also known as the Higher self ???
You wrote:
"But in meditation consciousness should withdraw
> from outer things and focus on itself."
My answer:
Well - yes, but how do you define outer things or beings?
Is it only the physical - or is it also the astral or mental ones ?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anand Gholap" <AnandGholap@A...>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2005 8:03 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Many Theos-talk members love and respect
Leadbeater.
>
>
> One should first know what terminology author is using. Annie
Besant
> standardised terminology which was followed strictly by all
authors
> later in Adyar TS. Ego means higher self or soul. In long series
of
> lives this soul or ego evolves. So it's evolution is important. In
> meditation consciousness should try to consciousness itself. In
most
> people consciousness focusses attention on external things
perceived
> by various bodies. But in meditation consciousness should withdraw
> from outer things and focus on itself.
> God means Parabramha which is described as "Of the Absolute, the
> Infinite, the All-embracing, we can at our present
> stage know nothing, except that It is; we can say nothing that is
not
> a limitation, and therefore inaccurate "
> It is true that nobody knows much about Parabramha or God. But
when
> occultist makes progress he knows unity of all.
> Logos does not have gender male or female as far as I know.
> Theosophy is complex so if a beginner is evolved intellectually
and
> to some extent spiritually, he would like books of Leadbeater.
>
> Anand Gholap
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-
> theosophy@s...> wrote:
>> Being an honest seeker, who also have seen Harry Potter,
>> I have a few questions:
>>
>> Is CWL suggesting, that one should concentrate upon the Ego, but
> not upon
>> God / Brahman ?
>> Or what is he suggesting ?
>> Should I meditate on my Ego and not on God/Brahman as Atma ?
>>
>> I quote CWL:
>> "Of the Absolute, the Infinite, the All-embracing, we can at our
> present
>> stage know nothing, except that It is; we can say nothing that is
> not a
>> limitation, and therefore inaccurate.
>>
>> 25.
In
> It are
>> innumerable universes; in each universe countless solar systems.
> Each solar
>> system is the expression of a mighty Being, whom we call the
Logos,
> the Word
>> of God, the Solar Deity. He is to it all that men mean by God. He
> permeates
>> it; there is nothing in it which is not He; it is the
manifestation
> of Him
>> in such matter as we can see. Yet He exists above it and outside
> it, living
>> a stupendous life of His own among His Peers. As is said in
Eastern
>> Scripture: "Having permeated this whole universe with one
fragment
> of
>> Myself, I remain".
>>
>> 26.
Of
> this
>> higher life of His we can know nothing. But of the fragment of
His
> life
>> which energizes His system we may know something in the lower
> levels of its
>> manifestation. We may not see Him, but we may see His power at
> work. No one
>> who is clairvoyant can be atheistic; the evidence is too
tremendous.
>>
>> 27.
> Out of
>> Himself He has called this mighty system into being. We who are
in
> it are
>> evolving fragments of His life, Sparks of His divine Fire; from
Him
> we all
>> have come; into Him we shall all return.
>>
>> 28.
> Many have
>> asked why He as done this; why He (Page 10) has emanated from
> Himself all
>> this system; why He has sent us forth to face the storms of life.
> We cannot
>> know, nor is the question practical; suffice it that we are here,
> and we
>> must do our best. Yet many philosophers have speculated on this
> point and
>> many suggestions have been made. The most beautiful that I know
is
> that of a
>> Gnostic philosopher:
>>
>>
> 29. "God is
>> Love, but Love itself cannot be perfect unless it has those upon
> whom it can
>> be lavished and by whom it can be returned. Therefore He put
forth
> of
>> Himself into matter, and He limited His glory, in order that
> through this
>> natural and slow process of evolution we might come into being;
and
> we in
>> turn according to His will are to develop until we reach even His
> own level,
>> and then the very love of God itself will become more perfect,
> because it
>> will then be lavished on those, His own children, who will fully
> understand
>> and return it, and so His great scheme will be realized and His
> Will be
>> done".
>>
>>
>> Now I ask you:
>> Is LOGOS as male or a female?
>>
>> I just ask you how this teaching by CWL would be absorbed by the
> beginner
>> Seekers of today?
>>
>>
>> -------
>> A few words:
>> >>> A different kind of Clairvoyance <<<
>> Those interested in understanding the problems surrounding "the
> true or
>> false
>> Teachers of the Theosophical arts" could with advantage read the
> content of
>> the following link and
>> use the words Theossophy as Theosophical/Theosophy= Sufi/Sufism
or
> similar:
>> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/sufi-shah.html
>>
>>
>>
>> from
>> M. Sufilight with a friendly smile...
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Anand Gholap" <AnandGholap@A...>
>> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 7:08 PM
>> Subject: Theos-World Re: Many Theos-talk members love and respect
>> Leadbeater.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > Here are some points.
>> > " The object of the whole previous evolution has been to
produce
> the
>> > ego as a manifestation of the Monad. Then the ego in its turn
> evolves
>> > by putting itself down into a succession of personalities. Men
> who do
>> > not understand this look upon the personality as the self, and
>> > consequently live for it alone, and try to regulate their lives
> for
>> > what appears to be its temporary advantage. The man who
> understands
>> > realizes that the only important thing is the life of the ego,
and
>> > that its progress is the object for which the temporary
> personality
>> > must be used. Therefore when he has to decide between two
possible
>> > courses he thinks not, as the ordinary man might: "Which will
> bring
>> > the greater pleasure and profit to me as a personality?"
> but "Which
>> > will bring greater progress to me as an ego?" Experience soon
> teaches
>> > him that nothing can ever be really good for him, or for any
one,
>> > which is not good for all, and so presently he learns to forget
>> > himself altogether, and to ask only what will be best for
> humanity as
>> > a whole. "
>> > Complete book can be read at
>> >
>> > http://www.anandgholap.net/Textbook_Of_Theosophy-CWL.htm
>> >
>> > Anand Gholap
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
