Theos-Talk Archives (January 2006 Message tt00022)

1/2/2006 2:42 AM

Dear C Z and friends:


Have you considered looking at 

PATANJALI'S YOGA SUTRAS  

which deal extensively with meditation and the many states of consciousness
that are within our understanding and control?  

I give below some interesting extracts on this marvelous study in the
potentials of our human consciousness and its universal scope.

Best wishes for 2006,

Dallas
===================


PATANJALI'S YOGA SUTRAS [ available at: 

PHOENIX  ULT    at       www.phx-ult-lodge.org/s

                Original editions of Theosophical Books & Texts,  
"on line" -- free:

SECRET DOCTRINE HPB
ISIS UNVEILED HPB
FIVE YEARS OF THEOSOPHY	HPB, etc.
        KEY TO THEOSOPHY & GLOSSARY HPB
MODERN PANARION 	HPB
        THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY HPB
TRANS OF BLAVATSKY LODGE  HPB
VOICE OF THE SILENCE HPB


       	OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY  Judge
       	ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS AT AN 
INFORMAL "OCEAN " CLASS R C
        POINT OUT THE WAY Ans. to 
Questions at "Ocean" Class J G

        BHAGAVAD GITA  Judge
BHAGAVAD GITA NOTES Judge
        ECHOES FROM THE ORIENT Judge
        EPITOME OF THEOSOPHY Judge
LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME	Judge 
        PATANJALI'S YOGA SUTRAS Judge
        THEOSOPHICAL FORUM  --  answers by  Judge 

        DHAMMAPADA  ( Footfalls of the Law )  Gautama Buddha
LIGHT OF ASIA, Arnold  Gautama
Buddha
LIGHT ON THE PATH M C

        FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER R C
UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY R C


[ For children ]

        ETERNAL VERITIES  R C
Manual for ETERNAL VERITIES 	
BECAUSE -- for Children who ask Why?	R C
BOOK OF IMAGES Dhyan Garga
TELL-TALE PICTURE GALLERY 
–Occult Stories by HPB and  W Q J

       	History  
THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (1875 - 1950) 
($ 6.00)

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

From: EVERYDAY QUESTIONS ON  
PATANJALI'S YOGA APHORISMS    

		
QUESTION	WHAT is the real and essential difference between Eastern
and Western psychology? That is, aside from the basis of reincarnation, what
would be a few primary differences, taking Patanjali as a type of Eastern
psychology? 

ANSWER The essential difference between the two is described in a
few words of Chapter XIV of NOTES ON THE BHAGAVAD-GITA: 

Both abound in classifications; those of the East are much more
numerous than those of the West and cover a far wider field; Western
psychology in its classifications refers solely to mental states. The
psychology of the Gita and the ancient sages classifies the moral states,
treating of the mental states as mere effects produced by moral conditions
(p. 197). 

A psychology which is founded on the study of moral conditions is
immediately and practically related to conduct. Eastern psychology is
therefore dynamic, not merely descriptive. 

The BHAGAVAD GITA, rich in oriental psychology, is above all a treatise on
action. Its purpose is to assist the reader in deciding what he ought to do.


Thus true study of Eastern psychology is impossible without living it as
well. In her article, "PSYCHIC AND NOETIC ACTION," [HPB Articles, II, p.
7...] H.P.B. identifies the two great springs of human action, the higher
and the lower. It is meant as a practical guide in the struggle for
self-knowledge. 

The classifications of WESTERN PSYCHOLOGY deal almost entirely with the
psychic nature and the psycho-physical correlations of the lower man. It
sets forth many details of psychic stimulus and response and describes
typical human behavior in individuals and in the mass. 

But Western psychology has no general doctrine of the nature of man, no
clear concept of soul, no serious consideration of the moral struggle. An
apt admission of the confusion of modern psychology is found in the words of
the late William McDougall, himself a leader in the field. "It remains," he
wrote in 1931, "a chaos of dogmas and opinions diametrically opposed, a
jangle of discordant schools and sects; a field exploited by quacks and
charlatans of every sort, preying upon the ignorance of a deeply interested
public which knows not which way to turn for authoritative guidance." 

EASTERN PSYCHOLOGY is the study of the mind as a principle in itself,
in its relation to external and internal experience, and in relation to the
Spirit or the Self. By understanding of the mind, the student learns to
overcome its limitations—its "modifications," as Patanjali calls them—and
thereby becomes a free being. 

This freedom is identical with knowledge, for it is the product of
knowledge. True psychology, therefore, is inseparable from philosophy; is,
in fact, a department of philosophy. In the West, psychology is the enemy of
philosophy and the ally of the grossest materialism. It is this materialism
of academic psychology which has delivered "a deeply interested public" into
the hands of "quacks and charlatans of every sort," as McDougall says. There
can be no true psychology without a philosophy of soul. 


Q	Is it possible for the public to be enlightened as to the
psychic and mental enslavement which follows the misuse of psychological
laws and principles? 

A	MENTAL ENSLAVEMENT, except for its extreme subtlety, is like
any other enslavement. Its victims can be enlightened if they are beginning
to be aware of their slavery and want to be free. 

There is a high degree of enlightenment today regarding the evils of drink,
but this does not prevent the increasing use of liquor in modern society. 

Public enlightenment regarding false psychologies and harmful psychic
practices will depend upon the public desire for knowledge on these
subjects. It is probable that a general interest in true psychology will
result only as a reaction to these abuses, to the excesses described by
H.P.B. in the Five Messages to American Theosophists. 

Meanwhile, students of the present day may spread the enlightenment
provided in Theosophy as widely as they can, so that the suffering and the
disillusioned will have opportunity to find the truth after bitter
experience starts them on the quest. 


Q	If the moral nature is to be developed ahead of the
intellectual, will it be necessary to change our entire educational system
as it exists today? 

A	The task of subordinating intellectual to moral development is
accomplished by individuals, not by "systems," educational or otherwise.
Educational theory and practice may place obstacles in the way of natural
development, but it cannot prevent men of will from reaching to the truth. 

When enough individuals place a higher value on moral integrity than on
intellectual facility, the educational system will undergo the natural
modifications required to introduce a similar emphasis in the schools. 

Systems reflect the thoughts of men, they do not create them, except as
"conditioning" operates as an influence in all human relations. Great moral
changes come about, not by changing "systems," but by creative thought and
action which lead men to rely on themselves instead of systems. Systems are
only social habits—no better, no worse, than habits of any other sort. 


Q	May the failure of Christianity be rightly attributed to false
psychology, in view of the fact that its dogmas have destroyed self-reliance
and all sense of individual responsibility? 

A	Christianity failed because it contracted the universal
Christos principle, potential in every man, to a single historical
personality, and made the moral evolution of all dependent upon the
achievement of one. As the questioner intimates, this undermined
self-reliance among Christians, with the logical effect of weakening
individual responsibility. 

Modern psychology is materialistic, largely because of the betrayal of the
Western world by its priests, who so degraded and distorted the original
psychology of the Gnostic Christians that modern thinkers felt it necessary
to make an entirely new beginning in psychology, leaving out the soul, and
even the mind, in order to avoid any resemblance to hated theological
dogmas! 


Q	Why does Mr. Judge, in the Preface to the Aphorisms, speak of
the mind as an "organ" Is not an organ "physical"? 

A	The mind is called an organ by Mr. Judge for the reason that
mind is a substantial and dynamic principle, and not the mere abstraction of
cognitive functions which modern psychology would have us accept as its
meaning. 

The power of Patanjali's psychological system is rendered into the Western
idiom by Mr. Judge precisely in this way. HE PROVIDES AN "ANATOMY" OF THE
MENTAL PRINCIPLE, AND BLUEPRINTS THE METHOD OF ITS CONTROL. 

His Preface makes clear that for him, Patanjali's teaching was not merely a
"theory of knowledge," but KNOWLEDGE ITSELF. Euclidean certainty of these
aphorisms challenges the reader to basic decisions. One does not "read" or
dabble in Patanjali. 

This psychology has the precision of a treatise on engineering; obedience to
its principles as stated is as crucial for soul-development as following the
known laws of stress and strain in physical construction. 

MIND IS THE PSYCHO-MORAL ORGAN OF THE EVOLVING EGO. 

It is the link between Spirit and Matter, the principle of individuation,
the source of all illusions and the means of overcoming them. Perfect
control of the mind is the dynamic aspect of self-knowledge. Adeptship is
simply the indivisible unity of mind and the spiritual will. 


Q	THE mind, it is said, is constantly modified by the perceptions
of the senses (p. xii). When the Soul is without concentration, it is
similarly modified by the senses via the mind ( p.3). When Soul is in
control (xiii), is it the Mind or the Soul that controls sense? Aphorisms 35
and 36 in Book I raise this point.) 

CONCENTRATION

A	To say that "the soul has concentration" is to describe a
condition under which the full energies of the matter-transcending self find
active expression through the mind. Therefore, there is no separate control
over the senses by either "soul" or "mind"—THE CONTROLLING ENTITY BEING
INDIVISIBLE AS ATMA-BUDDHI-MANAS. 

The difference between the "higher nature" and the "lower nature"
resides in the power of creativity—first distinguishing mark of the
self-conscious being. 

The "LOWER NATURE," expressing itself actively through a form of
intelligence we call "latent" manas, is simply instinctual in behavior.
Instinctual intelligence is never creative, but rather repetitive. 

The modern school of behavioristic psychology has studied long and arduously
the nature of instinctual intelligence and pronounced that intelligence is
derived from a conditioning process. This is quite correct. The error of
"behaviorism" from a Theosophical point of view is simply that such a
description becomes misleading if a further, and in this case, unwarranted
assumption is also made—that all intelligence is simply instinctual or
repetitive, and that therefore all conditioning comes from external sources.


One of the "conditioning" factors in the formation of new habits of
instinctual intelligence is the CREATIVE IMPULSE OF THE HIGHER MAN—the man
who thinks in terms of progress and evolutionary growth—the man who is quite
literally bored with a routine of sensations. New habits, on this view, are
formed from within as the always new purposes of soul are given preference
over the routinized purposes of the purely sensory self. 

It is only when the Buddhi-Manasic center of self-consciousness is afraid to
attempt the evolutionary growth for which it nevertheless secretly hungers,
that the energies of Buddhi flow back through a passive mind, serving no
evolutionary purpose, yet temporarily vivifying sensory pleasure. But since
a denial of the purposes of the inner self is implicit in this process, such
intensifying of sensory pleasure is sufficiently frustrating to the soul
nature to produce more actual neuroses than ever accrue from the too-stern
disciplines over the lower self recommended by the "denial" theory of
religious practice. 


Q	The Preface calls for sincere students and resolute students to
gain the knowledge implied in Patanjali's Yoga aphorisms. Is it possible
that there are today theosophists with the stamina to become true
occultists, in order to help the world in the present critical cycle? If so,
what are they doing toward this end? 

A	A text to answer this question might be Mr. Judge's statement,
that "the world of real occultists . . . goes on with the laborious process
of sifting out the living germs from the masses of men. For occultists must
be found and fostered and prepared for coming ages when power will be needed
and pretensions will go for nothing." 


Q	Can we suppose that H.P.B. came simply to found a Movement of
benevolent humanitarianism? 

A	The Third Object, read between the lines, or even as she stated its
meaning in "Recent Progress in Theosophy" (see THEOSOPHY for October, pp.
445-46), suggests that the development of real occultists is the very heart
of the Theosophic enterprise, for Brotherhood must not only spread as a
sentiment; it must become a power. 

When it is realized that the first step on the path to occultism is a
deliberate and thorough inventory of one's qualifications for this high
calling, then the self-imposed discipline of the Theosophic life may be
recognized as being in fact that step. 

It would be well to refer to the article, "WHAT IS OCCULTISM?" printed in
THEOSOPHY, VIII, 
p. 353, and to read Robert Crosbie on impersonality (The FRIENDLY
PHILOSOPHER, p. 127), for a better understanding of what Mr. Judge may mean
by "the living germs" on whom the future of the Theosophical Movement, of
all mankind, maybe, will depend. 


Q	IT is said (Preface, xiii) that "KNOWLEDGE EXISTS AS AN
ABSTRACTION." 
This is not clear. It seems that there could be no knowledge without the
knowers of it. On the other hand, if knowledge exists without knowers, where
does it exist. It is said that in the Astral Light are "all human actions
and things, thoughts and circumstances fixed," but how could they be
regarded as an "abstraction"? 

A	The "astral light" does not contain knowledge. Knowledge is a
manasically-perceived relationship between the Buddhic element of the
individual and "human actions and circumstances." Such relationships always
pertain to the "moral" aspects of human evolution which are simply the
specifics of interdependence. 

But moral knowledge is never the exclusive possession of any individual, for
MORAL KNOWLEDGE RESIDES IN A GRASP OF PRINCIPLES THAT UNDERLIE ALL
RELATIONSHIPS. Principles are "abstract" because they may be and are applied
in all directions—not just in certain specified instances—by the beingswho
seek to embody them. 

A principle is not possessed by an individual—he uses the principle,
and what he "possesses" is simply the sum total of results caused by his
application of the principle. 

Therefore, unless it is perceived that knowledge resides in the world of
principles rather than in the realm of specific actions, the only solution
to the human moral problem would be an enforced conformity to categorically
"good" actions. This latter tendency, the "materialization" of the moral
equation, characterizes all revealed or authoritarian religions—and moves
towards the stultification of individual growth in the attainment of
knowledge. 

Knowledge, when attained, is in a definitive sense "abstract," because it
resides in a grasp of principles rather than in a memorization of events.
There is no knowledge without the grasp of a principle, and a principle is
abstract, for the simple reason that if it is a principle it cannot be
limited by any single embodiment. 

All real scientific knowledge is "abstract" in origin, for it depends
upon the establishment of laws. 

To formulate a law means to discover a principle of relationship between
apparently unrelated objects and motions. The knowledge of the scientist,
measurable only by his discovery of abstract principle (since these
principles never reside in objects or motions themselves), comes to him as
he grasps the principle, not while he is engaged in sorting his "facts." 

The word "abstract" should also be related to the word "metaphysical." 

METAPHYSICAL REALITIES, not physical realities, are primary. It is only by
learning to think in terms of a metaphysical world of reality that man
learns to raise himself above the instinctual level of animal behavior.
Looking from below upward, all realities are very much "abstract," but that
fact makes their attainment more, rather than less, necessary. 


Q	In Aphorisms 2 to 13 (Book I), "Mind" is represented as an
internal tactile organ which conveys the properties of an object to the
Perceiver by forming itself in the image of the object. 

But this does not seem to be a "thinking" process, the latter being the
action of logically relating the properties of an object to those of other
objects or to successive states of the object itself. Thus the mind does not
here appear as a "thinker," but only as a perceptive organ. 

But again we are informed that the "soul" is in the same modification as the
mind when objects are being perceived. Thus the "soul" does not seem to be
the "thinker" either. The ultimate "Perceiver" we recognize as Atma; but,
between the perceiving organ and the "Perceiver" there seems to be a missing
link of thought. Are we to find it in a parallel definition of the
"principles"? 

A	The word "mind," as used by Patanjali, has two meanings. The
"tactile organ" is composed of a highly refined, tenuous substance—referred
to in The Secret Doctrine as "fifth-state matter." But the man, the
individual, is not a state of matter, nor a combination of states of matter.

MAN, AS THE CENTER OF SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS, is the causative and governing
balance between various states of matter. An illustration may be offered: A
lever is not even a potential mover of three-thousand-pound stones. When man
(or higher intelligence) is combined with the lever, the ability to handle
such weights is at least potential. The lever of itself cannot move
anything, nor can the man without the lever. Thus fifth-state matter is
simply the medium through which mind must function, even though it
(fifth-state matter) is also a conditioned aspect of intelligence itself,
having the sixth, or Buddhic state of matter, for its substratum. 

INDIVIDUALIZED MIND IS BUDDHI aware of the potentialities of fifth-state
matter, and, through that mirror, of the other states of matter represented
by the psychical and physical principles. Such "joining" or incarnation,
however, "produces" a new principle, a new form of being which may be called
THE SELF-CONSCIOUS SOUL—although the being is not new, but only the form of
being. 

Patanjali asserts a philosophy of "dualism." Together with Krishna, as
the latter sage speaks through the BHAGAVAD GITA, he teaches that all human
beings have both a higher nature—which is the same in all, and a lower
nature composed of elements which are the same in all. 

Man is the balance struck between the elements of the higher and lower
natures, and therein resides the individuality. 

THE MAN-ENTITY IS THE CENTER OF BEING, capable of consciously establishing
new relationships between the higher and lower elements of the states of
matter which surround him. The mind, then, is both a "tactile organ" or
substance, and directive mind or soul—the latter being more truly
metaphysical. 

The term BUDDHI-MANAS, as differentiated from Kama-Manas, is used to make
this distinction clear. 


Q	In Aphorisms 2 and 6, it is said (a) that one of the five
modifications of the mind is Correct Cognition, and (b) that the
modifications of the mind must be hindered if concentration is to be
achieved. Thus it would seem that in order to be perfected in concentration,
one must "hinder" Correct Cognition. Is, then, Correct Cognition
undesirable? 

A	"Correct cognition" employs the analyzing, weighing, measuring
aspect of the mind.

INTELLECT IS INDIRECT PERCEPTION THROUGH COGNITION. 

INTUITION IS DIRECT PERCEPTION. 

The scientist, and also every man, can only use "correct cognition" as a
means of opening up a passageway for intuition. 

The ability to synthesize, wherein intuition is employed, is never a
matter of establishing certain definitive, descriptive relationships between
objects, events and beings. It is the manifestation of the power to combine
essences of relationships in a single vision of meaning. 

If "concentration" is only upon the mechanical potentialities of the
mind-organ, the tendency to see only one relationship at a time between
objects will binder the synthesis of intuition. 

The mind, therefore, must be turned by philosophy to A CONSIDERATION OF
PURPOSE—the why of objective movements, in order to leave full opportunity
for direct or synthesizing perception. This was the story, self-told, of
Copernicus' discovery that the earth revolved around the sun. 


Q	In notes on Aphorism 17 (page 4): When "all lower subjects and
objects are lost sight of, and nothing remains but the cognition of the
self," does it mean a condition in which the will is, or is not, active? 

A	In simple psychological terms, the only INHIBITION OF THE WILL
is ANXIETY or FEAR. 

And man's fear is never fear of a thing, but simply doubt of his ability to
meet the "thing" if it should confront him. 

DOUBT OF ONESELF and fear of oneself are the anxieties of ignorance. 

No man who faces and knows himself is "afraid." Dissatisfied with his
present state he may be, but in such a case dissatisfaction is but a prelude
to an invocation of will to correct matters. Death is "feared" when
knowledge of the permanence of self is lacking or incomplete. 

Thus fearlessness is the first quality assigned by Krishna as a requisite of
successful discipleship—for ONLY WHEN A MAN REALIZES THE INEXHAUSTIBLE POWER
OF SOUL [BUDDHI-MANAS] CAN HE FULLY RELEASE THE WILL AND ATTAIN
CONCENTRATION. 

MEDITATION REPRESENTS THE QUALITY OF STEADINESS IN MENTAL AND MORAL
STATES which must be the accompaniment of a will grown strong. 

The common forms of will are not in action during meditation, but they are
present in a very vital sense—since their combined potential energies are
being reconstituted for newer and more meaningful expression. This is the
action of Soul, THE REGENERATION AND RECONSTITUTION OF THE WILL. 

The full power of Soul [BUDDHI-MANAS] resides in the bonds of spiritual
interdependence which reach out to and include all living things. All beings
are sources of our "individual" strength, though they are such sources only
because they are united in "the divine unity"— the One Self, the Universal
Will. 

Thus attention engrossed in failures, doubts and ignorance is but a
"hindrance." The will of the adept becomes fully active, because there is no
corner of the wide universe where he fears to enter. Will, as the force of
Spirit, moves in and from all beings in all states and conditions. But will,
in the individual, is often sundered, disparted, while it can be integral
and concentrated. 


Q	Aphorism 21 (page 10): "The attainment of abstract meditation
is speedy, in the case of the hotly impetuous." It does not seem natural
that the "hotly impetuous" would be capable of attaining the state of
abstract meditation. Why should not a calmer, steadier nature be better
fitted to attain that state? 

A	Use of the term "hotly impetuous" would seem to first remind
students that nothing is accomplished without passion. The fact that there
are many kinds and qualities of "passions" is only to say that even a Buddha
had first to desire to move toward universal understanding. The kingdom of
heaven is always taken by violence, for there comes a time in the
psychological life of every man when he must throw all trivial cautions to
the seven winds. Yet it is necessary to remind ourselves that Patanjali is
not implying that the person who is hotly impetuous in his relations to
others can reach "abstract meditation." He is the man "hotly impetuous" in
respect to his own inner battle. TO OTHERS, GENTLENESS, CALMNESS—TO ONESELF,
FIRE AND STEEL. 

Yet even when the state of abstract meditation is attained, this state
is but a field for future action, a condition of mind which can be used
wisely or not depending upon the degree of maturity of the being who has
reached that state. 

The state of meditation differs for each individual according to why he has
sought to reach it. If the "hotly impetuous" one desires the state as an
acquisition, for instance, he will never attain it fully. If he desires it
because he wishes to realize inner potentialities for the benefit of others
as well as himself, his impetuousness may be simply a disinclination to be
held forever in bondage to the energies of Kama. 


Q	Aphorism 17: Just how or what would be the thoughts of one who
is pondering on the highest powers of the mind "together with truth in the
abstract"? 

A	The "highest powers of the mind" provide the soul with the
metaphysical "contours" of relationships with other selves. 

The mind, when limited to functioning directly through the physical brain,
can never directly perceive relationships between beings, since its sight is
limited to the material effects of relationships and fails to illumine the
fundamental nature of the beings involved. 

"TRUTH IN THE ABSTRACT" might be regarded as representing the spiritual
relationships between beings.

The truth becomes constantly more "abstract," but at the same time, more
"real," with each new awakening to enlightenment, since in the final
analysis—which is reduction of all to One Spirit—beings are not "related" at
all, but identical in Atma. 

Therefore the highest faculties of mind begin operation from A BUDDHIC
PERCEPTION OF THE ONE, and proceed downward in consideration of the other
"principles"— which comprise the "differences" between individual beings. 

The highest use of the mind proceeds, then, from this deductive basis, the
inductive operation of intellectual faculties serving in proper balance ONLY
WHEN THE ONE SELF OF ALL CREATURES IS THE INTERNAL POINT OF DEPARTURE FOR
ALL REASONING. 

The favoring of "deductive" reasoning, however, is a dangerous doctrine in
an age corrupted by the acceptance of specific dogmas, unless it be made
clear that there is only one basis which can be trusted for deductive use of
the mind— THE BASIS OF AN ALL-PERVASIVE METAPHYSICAL UNITY IN SPIRIT. 


Q	Aphorism 50: Would worry be considered self-reproductive
thought in the sense of Aphorism 50, and also what about the endless going
over of past actions, usually to try to find justification for the acts
performed Would not this be analogous to a kama-lokic condition, except that
one meditating thus would have the chance to "pull out" of the state,
whereas in kama-loka the initial energy has to be exhausted there, the will
being inactive? 
     
A	Worry is not genuinely self-reproductive, for it is always
sustained by fear of the encroachment of external factors. 

Self-reproductive thought is inner generation. Self-reproductive thought, in
the sense of this aphorism, means SPIRITUAL IDEAS, constantly generating and
regenerating themselves from the inexhaustible reservoir of UNIVERSAL WILL,
LOCATED IN ALL THAT WHICH IS INFORMED BY SPIRIT. 


KAMA LOKA

Kama-loka is only apparently a fully subjective state. 

Actually it has been produced from former concerns about external things—all
those things less than spirit and soul. Its substance—that is, its apparent
reality—is simply the inevitable crystallization into semi-substantial form
of ideas based on incorrect cognition. 

Kama-loka is no more self-reproductive than is an astral or physical corpse.
It is possessed of residual energy, not creative energy, and will pass out
of existence as soon as the magnetic currents which are its substratum lose
their momentum. 


[THEOSOPHY Vol. 35, p. 28, 81, 129, 180]

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Captain Zen 
Sent: Sunday, January 01, 2006 
To: 
Subject: Re: Happy New Year to All

Not just a H N Y, but I wish you 
A very Happy Life Time,