Theos-Talk Archives (January 2007 Message tt00331)

Leon wrote: <<So, let it be known (at least to me that is:-) that none of it is 
"hearsay"... But is based actually on what has been seen by me directly from my 
zero-point center of inner visual image awareness (or imagination) in deep meditation, 
while contemplating the reverse engineering of the universe -- by peeling it 
from the outside in, like an onion... And, following it back, layer after layer 
of its physical and metaphysical evolution and involution, down to its primal 
beginning -- without violating any of the modern scientific theories or laws 
of physics along the way... And finding -- when I reached the last inner layer 
on the subtlest vibratory (near infinite frequency) plane of primeval energy 
spinning around the zero-point of absolutely nothing (from our physical point 
of view) -- that the inner trip down (or inward as the case may be) also was 
perfectly consistent with the reported mystical concepts of the ancient 
philosophers such as Hermes, Pythagorus, Plotinus, Porphyry, Plato, etc.   Who saw, 
as I did, deep into the metaphysical aspects of fundamental reality, and spoke 
of the zero or "laya" points that were the "father" (spirit or consciousness) 
and "mother" (substance emanating out of "abstract motion") among other things 
-- from which sprung everything in the universe.  Much like the Hermetic 
formula on the Smaragdine tablet -- which, BTW, was wrongly interpreted by the 
alchemists as a way to transmute lead into gold...  But actually, it referred to 
the inner nature of man and his transmutation of consciousness, as reflected 
in the process of universal involution and evolution.  Such concepts also were 
stated in the even more ancient formula in the many thousand years earlier 
Book of Dzyan or Kiu-Te, "the 3, the 1, the 4, the 1, the 5, the twice 7, the sum 
total."  Count the number of inner fractal spheres in my universal field 
involution diagram at: How It All Began
http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html>>

 
Okay but ... as I tend to see it, Theosophy and the Esoteric/Wisdom Tradition are significantly about alerting people that there are no models, sciences, beliefs, traditions or anything else in dualistic/multiplistic reality that isn't based on some kind of essentially dualistic (or dualistic/multiplistic) so-called "initial assumptions."   I have been speculating about the role of Maya in such assumptions and how one might transcend such assumptions.  So when I come across phrases like "working with karma in order to transcend karma" I tend to wonder about the role of Maya that "initial assumptions" (in the form of models, Theosophies, etc) might have in such workings.   Seems to me as if there might generally tend to be two kinds of interpretive extremes, theoretically, towards the study of Theosophy, with variations in between: 1.  studies by those who assume that various "initial assumptions" are somewhow "valid enough" on their own merits (as when literally interpreting something, leaving little or no room for stones left unturned that might not even be stones, Maya), and, 2.  studies by those who tend to refuse to take anything for granted.

Speculatively,
Mauri

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]