Theos-Talk Archives (July 2006 Message tt00296)

7/16/2006 7:28 AM

Dear Jerry:

You wrote:


DTB said	“True, THEOSOPHY is non-dogmatic. So, too, the THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY declares itself to be.”
 
GS	What is a dogma? Isn't it a tenet, an unprovable belief within an
organization? When you profess that karma is a law of justice, you are
setting up a dogma, and one that I do not agree with. HPB defines karma as
"ethical causation." 

The problem is that justice and fairness are arbitrary and subjective, and
if karma is a "law" then how can it be subjective?  I don't like subjective
laws. A "universal law" should be objective and not subjective.
 
…. I get annoyed when I see this same scenario in Theosophy.  On the other
hand, I have no solution for it.”

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

DTB	Jerry as I see it, 

“UNIVERSAL LAW” surrounds us in the amplitude of evolution and our own
existence.  It is supported by the processes of logic and thought which may
be called by some “subjective.” [I am not sure what this means unless it is
“not pictured or written.”  I think I see plenty of evidence for both these
criteria.

Let me quote from another friend: 

 “Light on the Path also says mysterious things about Faith, and Krishna
calls it a "spiritual power."   Here's the comments from Light on the Path:
 
"The truth is that faith is a great engine an enormous power, which in fact
can accomplish all things.  For it is the covenant or engagement between
man's divine part and his lesser self.
 
"The use of this engine is quite necessary in order to obtain intuitive
knowledge; for unless a man believes such knowledge exists within himself
how can he claim and use it?"
 
However HPB does warn us to remember that "Faith without will is like a
Windmill without wind."

Also:


				FAITH  &  BELIEF


Light on the Path also says mysterious things about Faith, and Krishna calls
it a "spiritual power."   Here's the comments from Light on the Path:
 
"The truth is that faith is a great engine an enormous power, which in fact
can accomplish all things.  For it is the covenant or engagement between
man's divine part and his lesser self.
 
"The use of this engine is quite necessary in order to obtain intuitive
knowledge; for unless a man believes such knowledge exists within himself
how can he claim and use it?"
 
However HPB does warn us to remember that "Faith without will is like a
Windmill without wind."

	
 I have trouble with "belief."
 
Over the years things and opinions have changed radically, so those views
taught to me when I was in school are supplanted by more refined ones. But
since I started my familiarity with Theosophy and its philosophy at about
the same time, and compared those with standard scientific views I find that
the Theosophical ones have stood the test of time.
 
To me "belief" or "faith"  implies a "guess," an "opinion," or "a  leap of
faith" -- without any knowledge to make it at least plausible. Where are the
laws that have to be in constant operation is my continued question.
 
I find the universe is full of laws, and the most disparate things and
events are considered and handled. Unknown vibrations transfix the Universe
– our apparatus detects them [Cosmic Rays, for instance] but tells us little
of their origin or purpose.  Why?
 
We need only review the history of scientific discoveries over the past 200
or so years.
 
To me, things tend to be harmonious in spite of particular areas of
conflict, chaos and disharmony.  The wider one is able to view, the more
definite is the sense of a universal condition of harmony – or, is this the
mysterious  "music of the spheres" that Pythagoras spoke  of ? 
 
Concerning some abnormal phenomena which are considered and explained by
theosophical philosophy, at most we can say we have yet much to find out.
So far everything that has been investigated shows that Nature or the
UNIVERSE (as a whole) contains and coordinates it in some way.
 
Theosophy speaks of the electro-magnetic "astral plane and models" as a
subsisting support for all "physical" forms in the matter we are familiar
with, starting from the molecule on up.  It is as though special whirls in
electro-magnetic fields at the sub-atomic-molecular level provide the
support for either aggregation or dispersal of forms that become perceptible
to our physical senses. What are these mysterious centers of “force?”
 
If any one of us takes a stand and says:  "It happened," or, "It did not
happen." Such a position is only an opinion -- as WE (as we are now) WERE
NOT THERE.

It seems futile to me to try to settle such matters 100, or more years,
after the events took place.  We can read testimonies, or memories of
witnesses, and remain about as doubtful as before.
 
So, why not say:  "Maybe they did."  And, to that we can add: "Are there any
comparable events happening these days?"
 
Further, during the past 100 + years, have such events been reported with
frequency?"
 
In any case THEOSOPHY is neither proved nor disproved by psychical
phenomena.  Its inherent logic  needs study and then analysis can be
attempted in a fair way.
 
		 ==============================

DTB

The Mahatmas also wrote about the "daily conquest of  self," as illustrated
in this passage from KH to  Sinnett: 	

"But what is Self? Only a passing guest,  whose concern are all like a
mirage of the great  desert. ..."
 
Psychic phenomena, by their very nature, can never be fundamentally real as
the word phenomenon (from the  Greek, phainomenon: "what appears")
indicates. Their study may be interesting but is relatively unimportant in
the perspective of the transformation of the human
consciousness.
 
It may also be important to note that the emphasis on the "daily conquest of
the self" is at the core of the great spiritual traditions of the world, way
before 1888. 

If it is true that Theosophy itself is at the heart of those traditions,
renunciation of the  personal self (and its attachments, opinions,
self-importance) may as well be one of its fundamental  teachings. In this
context, the words of the Buddha in  the Majjima-nikaya are quite pertinent:
"The Tathagata  has no views." 

How can there be universal brotherhood if MY opinion is more important than
someone else's
opinion?

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

	ANTIPODAL POWERS OF MANAS

(1) Faith-Belief
(2) Resignation-Indifference
(3) Receptivity-Passivity
(4) Enthusiasm-Fanaticism
(5) Good-Evil
(6) Freedom-License


	"MIND (OR MANAS--THE THINKER)".

The link to the "Antipodal Powers of Manas"
series is the 1st one that's listed in it:

http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/index.html#8
========================================

DTB

:  Fundamentalism (and dogma) as a point of discussion.


	SYMBOLISM OF  UNITY IN DIVERSITY
	====================================


"Krishna" can be considered as the Wise Teacher (of WISDOM --
Atma-Buddhi-Manas) within everyone.  "Arjuna" is made to represent Nara
--Man ad is considered the Mind/soul, the pupil or one still in the
Kama-Manas condition of thought  selfish.]


	The "DIVINE FORM" [during manifestation] INCLUDES ALL FORMS


“The eternal God” is the Perceiver [the Higher Self] within the divine form;
the “face . . . turned in all directions” is the “divine form,” which like a
spherical mirror reflects all things. 

All differentiations of substance occur within the divine form, and each
differentiation necessitates its own peculiar vibrations and modes of
expression, appearance, corresponding in the symbology used to “mouths,”
“eyes,” and “wonderful forms.”


	DEITY GEOMETRIZES

It has been said of old [Pythagoras, Plato] that “the Deity geometrizes.”
All forms evolve from within outwards. An inner mold or pattern outlines the
physical matter positions and conditions.

>From the “point” whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere, a
radiation, equal in all directions, begins, and it establishes both a
subjective and an objective circumference; a sphere, within which the
activity of the “point of origin” is particularly confined. As the UNIVERSE
is composed of innumerable such "points," tightly packed by their Karma --
inharmony with the WHOLE -- WE HAVE Manvantara as a continuous out-rolling
of events.  All are involved at all times. 

Metaphysically, the “point” spreading out horizontally becomes a diameter
dividing the sphere into positive and negative hemispheres, forming a basis
for action and reaction. 


	CIRCULAR MOTION

A further extension of the point vertically to the circumference divides the
sphere into four parts, represented on a plane surface as a cross within the
circle. Remembering that these extensions of the “point,” or center, are
lines of force proceeding from the center and tending to return to it, we
can conceive of the beginning of a revolution of the sphere whereby the ends
of the vertical and horizontal lines extend towards each other, forming at
first the ansated cross, and finally the square within the circle, in
reality, a cube or six-sided figure within the sphere. 

The cube, if looked at from either side presents the appearance of four
angles, which, if we can conceive of them as being luminous points
equidistant from the bright center, would be seen as a four-pointed star,
the symbol and sign of the animal kingdom. 

If we can imagine Arjuna as seeing within the “divine form” all living lines
of force and the forms produced by them, the four, the five, the six-pointed
star, and the many-sided figures, all in motion and of wonderful brilliancy
of light and of many colors, presenting the activities of all beings of
every grade in the universe, we may obtain some conception of the
descriptive parts of this chapter.


	TIME and CYCLES

Krishna speaks:  “I am Time matured, come hither for the destruction of all
these creatures.” 

“Time matured” means the completion of cycles; everything that begins in
time, ends in time; every action has its own cycle or period of return, or
re-action; it is action and actions that produce cycles, and these latter
range from those of momentary duration to those of a “great age,” as they
are produced by separate entities, classes of beings, or the collectivity of
actions by all beings of every grade concerned in any particular stream of
evolution. [Karma]


	IMPERMANENCE  OF FORMS  –  MAYA  –  CHANGE - PROGRESS

The general reference here is to the impermanence of all forms or
combinations of them. 
Change is necessitated by progress, for without change there would be
stagnation; hence the constant disintegration and re-integration of elements
in ever changing relation and form, all brought about by the requirements of
the Perceiver— the Real Man within—, who is the sole survivor through all
changes.

Arjuna says:  “Thou art the one indivisible Being, and non-being, that which
is supreme.” 
This statement can only be understood by each one applying it to himself. 

We know that we are not our bodies, for they constantly change, while we
remain the same identity through all the changes. We are not our “minds,”
for we change them whenever we find occasion to do so; if we were our minds
we could not change them, and further, it is apparent that “change” cannot
see “change ;“ only that which is permanent can see change. 

That permanency is the Real, the immortal Man, or, as the “Voice of the
Silence” states it, “the Man that was, that is, and will be, for whom the
hour shall never strike.” 

Each is the Self, the Perceiver; non-being, yet the cause and sustainer of
being; as the Gita states it in this chapter, “thou art the Knower and that
which is to be known ;“ “thou art the final supreme receptacle of this
universe”—the garnerer of all experience when this universe is dissolved. At
the end of the Great Cycle [Kalpa], which includes all minor cycles, all
beings return to the primordial state, plus the experience gained. The next
great stream of evolution will proceed on the basis of the acquired
knowledge of all beings concerned.
	from:  GITA NOTES   Ch  10  ( Pp.. 172 -6)


"Fundamentalism" to me implies the use of basic ideas from which the small
details of present operations, and a future continuity are always derived. 

The mindset of a true fundamentalist is to assist everyone around him.  

It is also educative since it demands that the basic ideas of life and of
progress be known and discussed. In this way it is generous, kind and also
tolerant. 

It makes no demands on anyone else than ones' lower self. It is not
judgmental.

In effect, it means we operate from the same shared planes and ideas of
knowledge -- some call it truth, others may call it virtue.  

It then serves to abridge lengthy explanations. 

But in no way ought it to imply that free-thought is to be limited.  Nor
does it imply we ought to be continually judging others and their motives.
It should never encourage any kind of prejudice. 


What are we humans? :  Thinkers !    At least on 3 levels in terms of time:

1	we have memories of what has happened,  	[ Past  ]

2	we observe now, and				[  Present ]	

3	we think of alternatives on which we will base our decisions.
		anticipation				[  Future  ]


If we seek to put everyone into the same straight-jacket it results in
failure. That is  (I believe) because THINKING has not been taught
systematically.

THEOSOPHY as I see it, points always to the ever-acting law of Karma.  Karma
provides freedom for everyone and everything. We are always dealing with
immortal Monads whose independence cannot be limited. How do we make
adjustments is the real question to ask.

What then is "black and white" --  Motive.  The reason why anyone does
anything. It is either selfish and isolating, or it is impersonally generous
and universally kind.  I think this definition is the great stumbling-block.
We have not been trained to think in that direction.  But there are good
reasons for it. 

In the survey of evolution given by THEOSOPHY it is shown that the Universe
is made up of innumerable "life-atoms."  ( Monads -- consisting of
permanently united SPIRIT / MATTER / MIND minute elements) .  These elements
are immortals -- they do not die but continually progress, ever moving all
together forward, as they learn through experience.   Eventually, over
millions of years, each such "life-atom"/ monad becomes independent as a
"feeler," as a "thinker" and finally as a Human. 

There, as in all of us, emotion and thought co-exist closely. Our present
task is apparently to discover how to separate these two and make good use
of them.  They are our tools and not our masters.  On this one point most
psychologists have trouble.  

It is because of this that THEOSOPHY teaches the difference between the
Lower and Higher Self.  In an ancient illustration the Higher Self was
compared to a bird sitting at the top of the Tree of Life.  Below it, it
brother, a second bird lives and eats the fruits of living. The lower bird
lives and works and as it meets problems, it asks for the advice of the
Superior bird who has acquired the wisdom of experience and Perfection. 

But for us,  looking at our present -- all as humans, the journey to
Perfection is now only half done.   The more difficult aspect begins.  The
"feeling nature" has realise that the "thinking nature" is its friend and
not its enemy. Both depend on each other. 

The rest of the effort as the Lower Mind is led upward, will have to be
actively guided by the intelligent thought and control of the Human-Monad
for itself in the company of all the rest. We are at the beginning stage of
this effort.  We live in emotional, sensitive and "feeling" forms.  In
effect we have created them by drawing together compatible assistants in the
form of the many "life-atoms" of lesser experience.  We have become their
guides and teachers. They depend on us, and as we make choices, they alter
and adopt them.  

It is for this reason that "bad choices" have to be first identified by us,
and then avoided. We mold those "lesser experienced monads," and they,
attached to us, become the carriers of the "bad Karma" we have imposed on
them by those molds.  [ And similarly, it works in the reverse way for
"good" Karma.] 

This is the reason for drawing attention to virtue as motive vs. vice as
selfishness. Every great religious reformer of whatever age has said this. 

What effect should this information have on us ? 

This means the smallest atom and the wisest Mahatma are actually differences
in degree of knowledge, function and WISDOM. The will to improve is made
active and paramount. It works only through open cooperation and selfless
interaction. We have to decide to live impersonally for all. Thus we help
and are helped in return. 

The atoms work with each other according to general laws of attraction and
repulsion that are innate to their quality.  The function of all atoms and
forms is to aggregate (as skandhas) and provide vehicles for higher
intelligences to reside therein. There is compatibility between these
aggregations and the single Monad which serves as a central point for them
-- It is that which we call: "I" in us.  

It has among other duties one that is automatic --  to help and arouse in
them a higher degree of intelligence and consciousness while they are doing
their duties each in its own way. Thus improvement is cooperative and a
constant effort. 

For such an enormous Universe as ours the nature of cooperative assistance
is a vita one -- as the amalgamation and the assimilation of every Monad
with the rest is continuous.  

The lines of force and of benevolence or of opposition run all through
Nature.  Which will we choose to assist?

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

Best wishes,

Dallas

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Schueler 
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2006 8:56 PM
To: 
Subject:  Some Remarks

-----  …  

2 
 
DTB quotes	“True, THEOSOPHY is non-dogmatic. So, too, the THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY declares itself to be.”


 GS
What is a dogma? Isn't it a tenet, an unprovable belief within an
organization? When you profess that karma is a law of justice, you are
setting up a dogma, and one that I do not agree with. HPB defines karma as
"ethical causation." The problem is that justice and fairness are arbitrary
and subjective, and if karma is a "law" then how can it be subjective?  I
don't like subjective laws. A "universal law" should be objective and not
subjective.
 
Anyway, I am probably nit-picking. I grew up in Christian Science which also
proclaimed to have no dogmas, and yet it's professed teachings were locked
in stone. I get annoyed when I see this same scenario in Theosophy.  On the
other hand, I have no solution for it.”

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