Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01623)

April 24 2005

Dear Friends:

The question of understanding "selfishness" in these days will be found
considered here:

MORALS & ETHICS BASICS.DOC
===========================

Re: Wadia: BUILDING THE HOME. (essays) 

Lets look at B. P. Wadia’s : BUILDING THE HOME. 

It is a series of articles reprinted. And I extracted many useful ideas and
principles from those for "future" use.

What you found there -- it is not "new." 

I think we will find: There is a certain curse to novelty. I mean: we
expect to have current problems identified and settled with well and simply
expressed solutions, and current references.

[Can you imagine HPB's problems with ISIS UNVEILED and the SECRET DOCTRINE
-- trying to provide links to ancient theogonies, and histories -- and her
era in the world's history and time? -- with almost 2,000 years of history
obliterated, thanks to the Church, Islamic and other fanaticisms ? ]

Let me advance the idea that those same "today's problems," are only repeats
of the old ones under new disguises and a new "title." At least the
'causes' seem 'new,' but the presentation is 'old.' (So are the principles
involved.) 

In BUILDING THE HOME we find that the moral and ethical reason for certain
ways and traditions is explained -- those have not changed over the
centuries -- but they might be explained in different words. 

[Some of the examples offered relate to traditional ways of life in certain
areas and castes of 'old India.' Superficially things have changed a lot
since they acquired their political freedom in India in 1947. 

Many of those old disciplines, family ways and neighbourhood customs were
designed to enable the “personality” to rid itself of its isolation and
selfishness, and better meld into the reality of an actual Brotherhood based
on the immortal Ego that ever reincarnates -- and, therefore, each life is
to be treated like a “day at School.” ]

In general: morals and ethics are not well understood and appreciated these
days as logical extensions of the basic FACTS and LAWS of the Universe :


1	Immortality of the reincarnating EGO (the immortal Monads) 

2	Universal evolution of the MONAD PILGRIMS, -- in terms of increments
of intelligence -- whereby UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD is indeed a part. This
leads to partaking of the “omniscience” (or sensitivity) of Nature –that
which gives an instant knowledge throughout the Living Universe of discord
as well as of harmony. [Our own body sensitivity is an illustration of
that.]

3	The UNIVERSAL and ALL-INCLUSIVE spiritual ambience -- called
"omnipresence" -- whereby our closest approach to GOD is within ourselves,
and not "outside." [see TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE pp. 64-6] This
does away with any "Personal God" idea. There is no such thing,
logically.  

The UNIVERSE is GOD, and any “ruler,” would have to be the “servant:of the
least of those that are ruled – in view of the universal potential of each
eventually acquiring all wisdom. The power that wisdom gives its possessor
has to be free of any taint of selfishness, or dominance and compulsion. It
cannot be enforced but its manifestation can be fostered and enabled by
example and precepts.  

I think this is the most difficult part: How to present, explain and
exemplify this paradox. I would suggest one can find it in Buddha’s
DHAMMAPADA (Footfalls of the Law); Krishna’s the BHAGAVAD GITA (the Song of
the Lord); and, in The VOICE OF THE SILENCE. [In us, the process of
impersonal meditation on the principles of being, lead to a perception of
the coherent cooperation and interaction at all levels of this omnipresence
of the SPIRITUAL SELF. We are a portion of IT.]

4	KARMA, the universal law of reciprocity and of cycles. It unites us
to (1) the sub-atomic, non-corporeal entities we might in today's scientific
language designate as minute "force fields" of enormous strength, and, (2)
to the utmost range of conceptualization our minds can imagine of the
Universe of GALAXIES. [Our own physical body, which is ruled by our
intelligent INDIVIDUALITY is a good example of this. Hence the statement
that "man" is the 'microcosm' of the 'MACROCOSM.' Also the concept that
there is only ONE CONSCIOUSNESS, and its many intelligent agents. Each
monad, each human, each world, each galaxy -- is one of these "agents."
Each has its own sphere of supervisory assistance. This assistance is
spread impartially to all its neighbours and "fellow pilgrims." Hence, the
"Masters of Wisdom" call themselves the: "servants of humanity." ]

5	Reincarnation. A universal fact that specifically includes our own
individual progress. {Hence, the idea that each life-time is like a 'day'
in the "School of Universal Experience."} This demonstrates the incredible
sensitivity of NATURE (another word for our world, our physical body, or,
the Universe -- as an active and living support system -- for all its
components. This does away with all special religious claims.

6	The "HOME" in these essays is our environment: physical, astral,
psychic, and spiritual. 

7	The BUILDING is our intelligent use of the wisdom THEOSOPHY provides
-- in our doing such duties as we perceive are naturally ours -- beginning
at our present personal, and then, the family level -- and projecting ever
further until we can involve the rest of our human race and its environment:
our Earth.

I find the marvel of THEOSOPHY is that it provides certain basic principles
as a kind of stable platform from which we may recreate, in an active way,
our own solutions.  

Now we may not always be right and in that case we can check them with
friends. 

Like you, I am always anxious to keep up to date, and when I read new
articles I continually refer mentally back to those principles and of curse
the earlier articles.  

Then I have to remind myself that the language may have changed and new
situations may have arisen.

Dallas

======================================================
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Of Anika Kinnara Durand
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2005 9:56 PM
To: Subject: Re: Pratyekha Buddhas



Hi Cass-

Very interesting topic! 

I wonder if it is possible for Western minds to enter into the realm of
"selflessness", which is more natural in Eastern cultures. 

The concept of Nirvana would seem foreign to most Westerners because the
Self is more prominent here. It still doesn't resonate with me, for example.
I'm with it up to place where I'm supposed to leave myself behind
(egolessness)...I can see blending in with the energy of it all, and
becoming one with the cosmos, and yet if I'm supposed do it without my own
unique perspective I might as well be you, or the postman. 

Which ain't "bad" it just makes it seem, to me, well "unatural". Nature
teems with 
personality and uniqueness (300,000+ varieties of the beetle, por exemplo),
and our species follows this along this path with 6 billion, and counting,
unique expressions of what existence is. To have this all blend in a sort of
tapioca of bliss...

Now, I'm not that well read on what Nirvana means to an Eastern mind, so
please 
forgive me if my reading of Nirvana isn't spot on. 

Now, about the idea of selfishness leading to a spiritual awakening, sure,
why not? 
There are as many versions to awakening as there are people, more even when
you 
factor in schitzophrenics...just kidding! But yes, darkness leads to light
and visa 
versa. But the realization, the awakening, the moment of "Ah, yes!"- that is
the 
desired state, yes? 

Some of us need the dark path, some take other routes. What is important is
that we all get there! And then, when we all meet up, to have great stories
to tell about our paths to the One...

Love,

niki

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

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "silva_cass" <silva_cass@y...> wrote:
 
Looking on the positive side, one or two questions, are raised in 
regard to this question, which I would like to explore with others.
 
The Prakriti [ Pratyekha ] Buddha is one who has found self realization
through 
selfishness. Nirvana for itself rather than renunciation to help 
others that are following. It is also said that the Prakriti Buddha 
must return from Nirvana to evolution at some point.  
 
What is this pointing to? Wasn't it the Lipika's [ NO ] who refused to
allow 
their astral bodies to be used for Mankind's evolution. The fall.  
This is suggesting a couple of things to me
 
1) That initiation is still possible through selfish motives 

2) This then suggests a negative aspect to godhood, the yin-yang 
if you like.

3) In the normal state of events of a Prakriti, this return to 
evolution is imposed upon them. How does this impact on Free-will?

4) Do they meditate on their spiritual selfishness and return to 
meet with their karmic consequences?
 
 
The true purpose of this list is to explore these difficult questions, 
in the true spirit in which they are offered - understanding.
 
Regards

Cass

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

QUOTES THAT MAY HELP


-------------------------------
S D II 78 - 82

But esoteric philosophy explains the original qualifications as being due to
the difference between the natures of the two classes: the Agnishwatta
Pitris are devoid of fire (i.e., of creative passion), because too divine
and pure (vide supra, Sloka 11th); whereas the Barhishad, being the lunar
spirits more closely connected with Earth, became the creative Elohim of
form, or the Adam of dust. 

..... the Agnishwatta, devoid of the grosser creative fire, hence unable to
create physical man, having no double, or astral body, to project, since
they were without any form, are shown in exoteric allegories as Yogis,
Kumaras (chaste youths), who became "rebels," Asuras, fighting and opposing
gods, etc., etc. Yet it is they alone who could complete man, i.e., make of
him a self-conscious, almost a divine being — god on Earth. 

[ P. 80] 

The Barhishad, though possessed of creative fire, were devoid of the higher
MAHAT-mic element. Being on a level with the lower principles — those which
precede gross objective matter — they could only give birth to the outer
man, or rather to the model of the physical, the astral man. 

Thus, though we see them intrusted with the task by Brahma (the collective
Mahat or Universal Divine Mind), the "Mystery of Creation" is repeated on
Earth, only in an inverted sense, as in a mirror. 

It is those who are unable to create the spiritual immortal man, who project
the senseless model (the Astral) of the physical Being; and, as will be
seen, 

it was those who would not multiply, who sacrificed themselves to the good
and salvation of Spiritual Humanity. For, to complete the septenary man, to
add to his three lower principles and cement them with the spiritual Monad —
which could never dwell in such a form otherwise than in an absolutely
latent state — two connecting principles are needed: Manas and Kama. 

This requires a living Spiritual Fire of the middle principle from the fifth
and third states of Pleroma. But this fire is the possession of the
Triangles, not of the (perfect) Cubes, which symbolize the Angelic Beings:
the former having from the first creation got hold of it and being said to
have appropriated it for themselves, as in the allegory of Prometheus. These
are the active, and therefore — in Heaven — no longer "pure" Beings. 

They have become the independent and free Intelligences, shown in every
Theogony as fighting for that independence and freedom, and hence — in the
ordinary sense — "rebellious to the divine passive law." These are then
those "Flames" (the Agnishwatta) who, as shown in Sloka 13, "remain behind"
instead of going along with the others to create men on Earth. 

But the true esoteric meaning is that most of them were destined to
incarnate as the Egos of the forthcoming crop of Mankind. The human Ego is
neither Atman nor Buddhi, but the higher Manas: the intellectual fruition
and the efflorescence of the intellectual self-conscious Egotism — in the
higher spiritual sense. The ancient works refer to it as Karana Sarira on
the plane of Sutratma, which is the golden thread on which, like beads, the
various personalities of this higher Ego are strung. If the reader were
told, as in the semi-esoteric allegories, that these Beings were returning
Nirvanees, from preceding Maha-Manvantaras — ages of incalculable duration
which have rolled away in the Eternity, a still more incalculable time ago —
he would hardly understand the text correctly; while some Vedantins might
say: "This is not so; the Nirvanee can never return"; which is true during
the Manvantara he belongs to, and erroneous where Eternity is concerned. For
it is said in the Sacred Slokas: 

"The thread of radiance which is imperishable and dissolves only in Nirvana,
re-emerges from it in its integrity on the day when the Great Law calls all
things back into action. . . ." 

Hence, as the higher "Pitris or Dhyanis" had no hand in his physical
creation, we find primeval man, issued from the bodies of his spiritually
fireless progenitors, described as aëriform, devoid of compactness, and
MINDLESS. 

He had no middle principle to serve him as a medium between the highest and
the lowest, the spiritual man and the physical brain, for he lacked Manas.
The Monads which incarnated in those empty SHELLS, remained as unconscious
as when separated from their previous incomplete forms and vehicles. 

There is no potentiality for creation, or self-Consciousness, in a pure
Spirit on this our plane, unless its too homogeneous, perfect, because
divine, nature is, so to say, mixed with, and strengthened by, an essence
already differentiated. It is only the lower line of the Triangle —
representing the first triad that emanates from the Universal MONAD — that
can furnish this needed consciousness on the plane of differentiated Nature.
But how could these pure Emanations, which, on this principle, must have
originally been themselves unconscious (in our sense), be of any use in
supplying the required principle, as they could hardly have possessed it
themselves? The answer is difficult to comprehend, unless one is well
acquainted with the philosophical metaphysics of a beginningless and endless
series of Cosmic Re-births; and becomes well impressed and familiarised with
that immutable law of Nature which is ETERNAL MOTION, cyclic and spiral,
therefore progressive even in its seeming retrogression. 

The one divine Principle, the nameless THAT of the Vedas, is the universal
Total, which, neither in its spiritual aspects and emanations, nor in its
physical atoms, can ever be at "absolute rest" except during the "Nights" of
Brahma. Hence, also, the "first-born" are those who are first set in motion
at the beginning of a Manvantara, and thus the first to fall into the lower
spheres of materiality. They who are called in Theology "the Thrones," and
are the "Seat of God," must be the first incarnated men on Earth; and it
becomes comprehensible, if we think of the endless series of past
Manvantaras, to find that the last had to come first, and the first last. We
find, in short, that the higher Angels had broken, countless aeons before,
through the "Seven Circles," and thus robbed them of the Sacred fire; 
[81]

which means in plain words, that they had assimilated during their past
incarnations, in lower as well as in higher worlds, all the wisdom therefrom
— the reflection of MAHAT in its various degrees of intensity. No Entity,
whether angelic or human, can reach the state of Nirvana, or of absolute
purity, except through aeons of suffering and the knowledge of EVIL as well
as of good, as otherwise the latter remains incomprehensible. 

Between man and the animal — whose Monads (or Jivas) are fundamentally
identical — there is the impassable abyss of Mentality and
Self-consciousness. What is human mind in its higher aspect, whence comes
it, if it is not a portion of the essence — and, in some rare cases of
incarnation, the very essence — of a higher Being: one from a higher and
divine plane? Can man — a god in the animal form — be the product of
Material Nature by evolution alone, even as is the animal, which differs
from man in external shape, but by no means in the materials of its physical
fabric, and is informed by the same, though undeveloped, Monad — seeing that
the intellectual potentialities of the two differ as the Sun does from the
Glow-worm? And what is it that creates such difference, unless man is an
animal plus a living god within his physical shell? Let us pause and ask
ourselves seriously the question, regardless of the vagaries and sophisms of
both the materialistic and the psychological modern sciences. 

To some extent, it is admitted that even the esoteric teaching is
allegorical. To make the latter comprehensible to the average intelligence,
requires the use of symbols cast in an intelligible form. Hence the
allegorical and semi-mythical narratives in the exoteric, and the (only)
semi-metaphysical and objective representations in the esoteric teachings.
For the purely and transcendentally spiritual conceptions are adapted only
to the perceptions of those who "see without eyes, hear without ears, and
sense without organs," according to the graphic expression of the
Commentary. The too puritan idealist is at liberty to spiritualise the
tenet, whereas the modern psychologist would simply try to spirit away our
"fallen," yet still divine, human Soul in its connection with Buddhi. 
The mystery attached to the highly spiritual ancestors of the divine man
within the earthly man is very great. His dual creation is hinted at in the
Puranas, though its esoteric meaning can be approached only by collating
together the many varying accounts, and reading them in their symbolical and
allegorical character. So it is in the Bible, both in Genesis and even in
the Epistles of Paul. For that creator, who is called in the second chapter
of Genesis the "Lord God," is in the original the Elohim, or Gods (the
Lords), in the plural; and while one of them makes the earthly Adam of dust,
the other breathes into him the breath of life, and the third makes of him a
living soul 
82


--------------------------------------------

S D II 109 -110

"...The "One thing" mentioned in it is MAN. 

It is said: "The Father of THAT ONE ONLY THING is the Sun; its Mother the
Moon; the Wind carries it in his bosom, and its nurse is the Spirituous
Earth." In the occult rendering of the same it is added: "and Spiritual Fire
is its instructor (Guru)." 

This fire is the higher Self, the Spiritual Ego, or that which is eternally
reincarnating under the influence of its lower personal Selves, changing
with every re-birth, full of Tanha or desire to live. 

It is a strange law of Nature that, on this plane, the higher (Spiritual)
Nature should be, so to say, in bondage to the lower. Unless the Ego takes
refuge in the Atman, the ALL-SPIRIT, and merges entirely into the essence
thereof, the personal Ego may goad it to the bitter end. This cannot be
thoroughly understood unless the student makes himself familiar with the
mystery of evolution, which proceeds on triple lines — spiritual, psychic
and physical. 

That which propels towards, and forces evolution, i.e., compels the growth
and development of Man towards perfection, is 

(a) the MONAD, or that which acts in it unconsciously through a force
inherent in itself; and 

(b) the lower astral body or the personal SELF. 

The former, whether imprisoned in a vegetable or an animal body, is endowed
with, is indeed itself, that force. Owing to its identity with the
ALL-FORCE, which, as said, is inherent in the Monad, it is all-potent on the
Arupa, or formless plane. 

On our plane, its essence being too pure, it remains all-potential, but
individually becomes inactive: e.g., the rays of the Sun, which contribute
to the growth of vegetation, do not select this or that plant to shine upon.
Uproot the plant and transfer it to a piece of soil where the sunbeam cannot
reach it, and the latter will not follow it. 

So with the Atman: unless the higher Self or EGO gravitates towards its Sun
— the Monad — the lower Ego, or personal Self, will have the upper handin
every case. 

For it is this Ego, with its fierce Selfishness and animal desire to live a
Senseless life (Tanha), which is "the maker of the tabernacle," as Buddha
calls it in Dhammapada (153 and 154)." S D II 109-110

--------------------------------------

S D II 167-8

We now come to an important point with regard to the double evolution of the
human race, or the spiritual Dhyanis, had become "intellectual" through
their contact with matter, because they had already reached, during previous
cycles of incarnation, that degree of intellect which enabled them to become
independent and self-conscious entities, on this plane of matter. They were
reborn only by reason of Karmic effects. 

They entered those who were "ready," and became the Arhats, or sages,
alluded to above. This needs explanation. 

It does not mean that Monads entered forms in which other Monads already
were. They were "Essences," "Intelligences," and conscious spirits; entities
seeking to become still more conscious by uniting with more developed
matter. 

Their essence was too pure to be distinct from the universal essence; but
their "Egos," or Manas (since they are called Manasaputra, born of "Mahat,"
or Brahma) had to pass through earthly human experiences to become all-wise,
and be able to start on the returning ascending cycle. 

The Monads are not discrete principles, limited or conditioned, but rays
from that one universal absolute Principle. 

The entrance into a dark room through the same aperture of one ray of
sunlight following another will not constitute two rays, but one ray
intensified. It is not in the course of natural law that man should become a
perfect septenary being, before the seventh race in the seventh Round. Yet
he has all these principles latent in him from his birth. Nor is it part of
the evolutionary law that the Fifth principle (Manas), should receive its
complete development before the Fifth Round. 

All such prematurely developed intellects (on the spiritual plane) in our
Race are abnormal; they are those whom we call the "Fifth-Rounders." 

Even in the coming seventh Race, at the close of this Fourth Round, while
our four lower principles will be fully developed, that of Manas will be
only proportionately so. This limitation, however, refers solely to the
spiritual development. The intellectual, on the physical plane, was reached
during the Fourth Root-Race. 

Thus, those who were "half ready," who received "but a spark," constitute
the average humanity which has to acquire its intellectuality during the
present Manvantaric evolution, after which they will be ready in the next
for the full reception of the "Sons of Wisdom." 

While those which "were not ready" at all, the latest Monads, which had
hardly evolved from their last transitional and lower animal forms at the
close of the Third Round, remained the "narrow-brained" of the Stanza. This
explains the otherwise unaccountable degrees of intellectuality among the
various races of men — the savage Bushman and the European — even now. Those
tribes of savages, whose reasoning powers are very little above the level of
the animals, are not the unjustly disinherited, or the unfavoured, as some
may think — nothing of the kind. They are simply those latest arrivals among
the human Monads, which were not ready: which have to evolve during the
present Round, as on the three remaining globes (hence on four different
planes of being) so as to arrive at the level of the average class when they
reach the Fifth Round. 

One remark may prove useful, as food for thought to the student in this
connection.

The MONADS of the lowest specimens of humanity (the "narrow-brained" savage
South-Sea Islander, the African, the Australian) had no Karma to work out
when first born as men, as their more favoured brethren in intelligence had.
The former are spinning out Karma only now; the latter are burdened with
past, present, and future Karma. In this respect the poor savage is more
fortunate than the greatest genius of civilised countries. 

Let us pause before giving any more such strange teachings. Let us try and
find out how far any ancient Scriptures, and even Science, permit the
possibility of, or even distinctly corroborate, such wild notions as are
found in our Anthropogenesis. 
Recapitulating that which has been said we find: — That the Secret Doctrine
claims for man, (1) a polygenetic origin. (2) A variety of modes of
procreation before humanity fell into the ordinary method of generation. (3)
That the evolution of animals — of the mammalians at any rate — followsthat
of man instead of preceding it. And this is diametrically opposed to the now
generally accepted theories of evolution and the descent of man from an
animal ancestor. 
S D II 167-8

----------------------------------