From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 00:56:45 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id AAA11504 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 00:03:43 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: LeonMaurer@aol.com
Message-ID: <8c07468e.36b54365@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 01:02:13 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE: Theos-World Practical theosophy: was DEFENSE OF HPB and moving on.
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 54
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 1/31/99 1:29:12 AM, peter.merriott@dial.pipex.com writes:
(Paul)
>> Is not our object the progress/elevation of Humanity as a WHOLE?
>> Why focus on the illusory 'part'?
>
>Which led me to ask: what does this mean for us as aspiring practical
>theosophists; how do you use and translate this noble object into action
>in daily life, in relating to the people around us?
To answer the above questions, I think it is first important to understand the
nature of the causation (initial emanation and cyclic inflation-expansion)
behind the birth and evolution of the phenomenal Universe which makes it
obvious that we are each an integral part of the universal origin and
intelligence, and thus, a spiritual "brother" with every other sentient being
originating from the same source.
The only thing that keeps us from this "realization" of unity with the "source
of ALL" (i.e. "experiencing" a profound conviction that "as above, so
below")--is the illusion of false reality and the concept of separateness we
create in our own minds due to ignorance of the true "coadunitive but not
consubstantial" nature of Cosmogenetic and Anthropogenetic fields. Believing
in modern empirical science doesn't help at all in eliminating this
fundamental ignorance, unfortunately.
Our relationship with all other sentient beings, therefore, depends upon such
understanding of our own inner nature and its (and their) inherent identity
with that of the universe itself. Having such a realization will assist in
linking our intelligence with the knowledge we need to help and teach others
so that they can resolve their own karma. That's all the "action" we need "in
daily life, in relating to the people around us."
All this is thoroughly described in the Book of Dzyan and explained in the
Secret Doctrine. But, before we can experientially "realize" these truths, we
may need to "picture in our minds" the nature and origin of the fundamental
harmonic fields we emanate from, are a part of, and which we contain as
analogous sub harmonic "fields" surrounding us. Such a multidimensional,
graphically geometric, visual understanding (i.e., actually "seeing" that
"what is above is also below") will make it easier to understand our
individual nature, its purpose, and its relationship to the overall evolution
of universal consciousness--as it experiences ITSELF through its myriad
"sparks" or "rays" of individualized awareness... With each such
individuality or "Ego" imbued on this plane with independent choice or "free
will."
It can also help us show others the natural way in which evolution works, and
by analogy and correspondence, demonstrate that everything experienced is
eternally conserved and "remembered" as vibratory holographic "image" patterns
that inductively resonate from field to field. This easily leads to an
understanding of the necessity for karma and reincarnation to restore the
balance and harmony of the original ideal field forms which have been
disturbed by our more or less ignorant choices of action. That is, until we
achieve an enlightened and true perception of reality, cease "acting", and
commence "living in the flow".
To help facilitate achievement of this perceptive understanding, I have posted
a diagram on the web** that symbolizes the cross section of the (spherical)
universal field showing the cyclic energy flow paths in and through the
harmonic and sub-harmonic fields nested within it. The diagram pictures the
primal "mother" field, after initial "inflation" out of the "void," as it
progresses down the harmonic scales, through descending octaves, from the near
infinitely rapid vibrational frequencies of the "higher" consciousness fields
to the relatively slow vibrational frequencies of the "lower" substantial
fields--where we self-consciously experience our individual "mental-physical"
states of being.
Not only does this cyclic diagram picture the astro-biological-coenegetic
relationship between these fields, as well as the universality of the laws of
cycles and periodicity, but it also indicates the relationships of the
descending fields with the theosophical divisions of our sevenfold nature, as
well as correlates them with the musical scale and the color spectrum. (All,
the result of analogous vibrational characteristics of harmonic spherical
fields.) It is also consistent with all the numerical divisions and
evolutionary "formulas" given out in the Secret Doctrine and as reflected in
the Cabbala, I-Ching, Vedas, and other ancient teachings.
This image can be meditated on while practicing a mindful (Jnana-Rajah-
Vipassiona) yoga similar to those described in "Patanjali's Yoga Aphorisms"
(as transliterated for theosophical study by WQJ) as well as in the "Voice of
the Silence" (as similarly transliterated by HPB). Also included on the web
page, is a description of a dynamic visual meditative practice of tracing the
energy flows through the coenergetic fields in correspondence with the inner
paths of energy flow through the human "Koshas" and "Chakras." This form of
visualization can be very useful when practiced along with pranayana. It is
specifically designed to open up the "third eye" (which, as an intuitive hint,
is represented by the "zero-point center" of the "Mother field").
**
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
Hope this helps.
Best wishes,
LHM
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 08:54:02 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA23658 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:31:38 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <36B565FB.6F54867B@geocities.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 09:29:48 +0100
From: Raffaella
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Re:A few questions on a touchy subject...
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>From: "N.Malcom"
>Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:30:32 -0600
>Subject: Re: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...
>How are you definning "soul"? I thought a soul was simply a sheath. ???
>Nancy
Hmmm, maybe that's not the right term for what I meant? Perhaps this will
help: Its the part of us that moves on into the next incarnation, that has all
the learning from our past lives, maybe it's called the 'higher' self? Again,
not sure of my terms, but from what I understand of reincarnation, the
physical body passes away, but the spirit lives on.
Where my questions come in, is that a clone is a copy of a person who already
has a soul/spirit. Interesting puzzle, eh? :)
-Angie C.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 11:07:22 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA08093 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:02:22 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990201170033.1533.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World R A Gilbert & Mahatma Letters
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 09:00:26 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Who is R A Gilbert?
Does someone have any comments about this?
> Subject: Mahatma Letters (Gilbert)
>
> PREFACE to Reprint of "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
>
> by R.A.Gilbert
>
> All of the central tenets of Theosophy - as the term is
> understood within the Theosophical Society - are contained in The
> Mahatma Letters, which were transmitted to A.P. Sinnett and
> others between 1880 and 1884. Extracts from the letters were
> published by Sinnett in The Occult World (1881) and Esoteric
> Buddhism (1883) but they were not published in their entirety
> until 1923 when A.T. Barker issued them as The Mahatma Letters
> to A.P. Sinnett. The letters provide an effective source-book
> for the doctrines elaborated in H.P. Blavatsky's The Secret
> Doctrine (1888) and espoused by the great majority of latter-day
> theosophists, but the origin of the letters remains problematic.
>
> Sinnett believed that they were miraculously 'precipitated',
> travelling thousands of miles to reach him in India or England
> from the Mahatmas' home in Tibet. Others remained sceptical,
> arguing that the letters were not only delivered by Mme.
> Blavatsky but also composed and written by her. The battle-lines
> are still drawn up, with believers and sceptics hurling a steady
> stream of invective at each other and rarely supporting their
> positions by rational argument. Perhaps the most sober defence
> has been offered by Geoffrey Barborka in The Mahatmas and their
> Letters (1973), while the most devastating attack upon the
> supernatural origin of both the letters and their authors is Who
> Wrote the Mahatma Letters?, by H.E. & W.L. Hare (1936) - a
> critique which has yet to be rationally rebutted.
>
> Arguing over the source of the letters may seem pointless if one
> considers that the real issue is the spiritual merit, or
> otherwise, of their content. But spiritual truths are not best
> served if they are disseminated by fraud, and it is as well to
> establish the truth about the origin of the letters (insofar as
> it can ever be fully known) if we are to judge the contents on
> their value as spiritual philosophy. For this reason, if for no
> other, Arthur Lillie's forgotten pamphlet of 1883 deserves to be
> read and studied with care.
>
> At the time of its publication Koot Hoomi Unveiled was attacked
> with vitriolic abuse but with precious little reason, and
> Lillie's strictures have remained largely unanswered. With
> hindsight it is possible to point out the superficial nature of
> some of his comments on Tibetan Buddhism, but his critics
> necessarily used the same texts and commentaries as were
> available to him and their counter arguments thus carry very
> little weight.
>
> Such ripostes as they did make were fully answered in Lillie's
> long letter justifying his case that appeared in the journal
> Light in August, 1884, and which is reprinted here.
>
> It should also be borne in mind that Arthur Lillie was neither an
> hysterical defender of the claims of Spiritualism against those
> of Theosophy, nor an unthinking, fundamentalist Christian
> opponent of 'Esoteric Buddhism'. He was a sound scholar with a
> profound knowledge of, and sympathy for, the Buddhist religion.
> From 1883 to 1912 he produced a series of scholarly works on the
> life of the Buddha and on Buddhist and Vedantist influences upon
> both early Christianity and classical Greece. He was a Member of
> the Royal Asiatic Society, in whose library his books are still
> to be found. On a more popular level he wrote brief biographies
> of mystics and other esoteric writers, ranging from Boehme and
> Swedenborg to Stainton Moses and Madame Blavatsky.
>
> While he clearly rejected the ideas of H.P.B. he remained
> scrupulously objective when he wrote his studies of her, and his
> views on the Mahatma letters deserve careful consideration -
> whether or not we agree with them.
>
> Indeed, it is only by emulating Lillie's meticulous attention to
> detail that we shall be able to arrive at a true understanding of
> the origin and nature of the Mahatma letters, and only then can
> we truly be said to have stood firm by the motto of the
> Theosophical Society: 'There is no Religion higher than Truth.'
>
> R.A. GILBERT
>
> Bristol, September 1995
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 11:22:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA09533 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:18:22 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990201171712.25476.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Agehananada Bharati, "Fictitious Tibet" & Mrs Blavatsky
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 09:16:43 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Agehananada Bharati, "Fictitious Tibet: The Origin and
> Persistence of Rampaism", Tibet Society Bulletin, Vol. 7, 1974
>
> Let me first of all stake my claim and explain some terms in the
> title: an apparently unexterminable tradition of sheer fiction
> taken as holy fact originated in Europe and America slightly
> before the turn of the century -- the brainchild of some fertile
> writers and orators, a number of core tales about inaccessible
> Tibetan and Himalayan mystics took shape in contrivedly esoteric
> writings which gained steady momentum until its culmination in
> Lama Lobsang Rampa's, alias Mr. Hoskins', fantastically
> fraudulent output beginning with The Third Eye and its sequels.
> I call this whole phony tradition "Rampaism" after its phony
> consummator, Rampa- Hoskins, and his all-too-numerous followers
> in North America and Europe. This depressing crowd of partly
> well-meaning, totally uninformed, and seemingly uninformable
> votaries holds something like this as its modal view: that there
> is, somewhere hidden in the Himalayas (invariably mis-stressed on
> the penultimate 'a'), a powerful, mystical, initiate brotherhood
> of lamas or similar guru adepts, who not only know all the
> mysteries of the world and the superworld, who not only
> incorporate and transcend the teachings of Buddhism, Hinduism,
> and Christianity, but who also master all the occult arts -- they
> fly through the air at enormous speeds, they run 400 miles at a
> stretch without break, they appear here and there, and they are
> arch-and-core advisors to the wise and the great who hide these
> ultimate links to supreme wisdom and control. In addition, they
> know all their previous incarnations, and can tell everyone what
> his incarnations were and are going to be. Geographically, the
> area where these supergurus reside is nebulously defined as
> "Tibet," "Himalaya," and it often includes the Ganges and India.
> This, very briefly, is the somewhat autoerotic creed of a large,
> and unfortunately still growing, crowd of wide eyed believers in
> the mysterious East, apropos which my colleague Professor Hurvitz
> at the University of British Columbia sagaciously remarked that
> "for these people, the East must be mysterious, otherwise life
> has no meaning." To put this somewhat less succinctly and more
> technically, the enormous, pervasive alienation of Euro-America
> from the religious themes of the Western world, matched with the
> general disgruntlement, with the superciliously religious in the
> established churches, the surfeit with scientific models which
> seem to generate war and destruction, and most recently the
> proliferating fascination with the exotic for its own sake --
> about which later in greater detail -- all these contribute to
> the desperate quest for ideas, rituals, and promises that are
> different from those of the West, that are distant from the West,
> and that are easily accessible, without any intellectual effort,
> without any discursive input.
>
> Let me now present an historical sketch of the increasing ingress
> of pseudo-Orientalia, and specifically of pseudo-Buddhica and
> pseudo- Tibetica into Europe and America. During my research
> into ideological change in the Buddhist clergy in Sri Lanka in
> 1971, I marveled at a painting in a temple in the southernmost
> part of the island. In a long subterranean corridor, some two
> hundred vignettes depicting the phases of the dharma from its
> inception under the Bodhi-tree in Buddhagaya to the foundation of
> the particular temple, the last one showed a white woman kneeling
> and bowing down before the image of the Tathagata and two monks
> administering sil (the five precepts of Thervada Buddhism) to
> her; behind her, several white men in tropical hats and western
> suits, one of them bearded. These, so the monk who showed me
> around informed me, were Mme. Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott
> embracing Buddhism. This is historically quite correct. The
> well-meaning American Colonel Olcott and the Russian-born Mme.
> Blavatsky, founders of the Theosophical Society, did indeed
> undergo that ceremony of initiation in that shrine in Sri Lanka.
> Annie Besant became a convert to Mme. Blavatsky, rather than to
> Buddhism, about a decade later. Leadbetter and other founding
> members formed the incipient caucus of the Society which still
> survives, albeit in highly modified and in a largely reduced form
> when compared to the initial thrust into the religious
> ideological world of the early 20th century. Now we must
> distinguish between the genuine and the spurious elements in the
> movement as it relates to Buddhism. Annie Besant was no doubt a
> sincere woman; one of the British Empire's most powerful orators,
> cofounder of the Indian National Congress, and a fine mind,
> genuinely annoyed at the inanities perpetrated by and constituted
> in the missionary scene. Col. Olcott was a genuine person, too,
> concerned with human affairs, and strongly cognizant of religious
> options other than those of Christianity. But I think Mme.
> Blavatsky and Leadbetter were frauds, pure and simple. My
> definition of a fraud or phony does not quite coincide with the
> usual dictionary meanings of these terms. A phony does not
> necessarily doubt the theses he or she propounds -- in fact they
> can be full believers themselves. But what makes them phonies is
> their basic attitude of refusal of matching their tenets with
> those of a genuine tradition, and of imitating lifestyles which
> are alien to them, by doing things that superficially look part
> of the lifestyle they imitate, or of imitational lifestyles which
> simply do not exist in any cultural body, except as
> idiosyncrasies. Leadbetter wrote about the kundalini, the secret
> serpent power, and a melee of things exoteric and other which he
> had picked up from Indian sources in early translations. He
> never learned any of the primary languages -- Sanskrit, Pali,
> Tibetan; neither did Besant, Olcott, and Blavatsky. Leadbetter
> was an aggressive homosexual, and there is no doubt in my mind
> that he used his esoteric homiletic to seduce young men -- some
> of them very famous indeed in later days. Now I don't object to
> homosexuality -- I think the Gay Freedom movement is well taken
> and should succeed. But I do object to utilizing bits of
> theological or other religious doctrinal material to support
> one's own aesthetical and sensuous predilections. Hindu Buddhist
> Tantric texts do indeed use sexual models and analogues in their
> esoteric tracts, so it is quite in order if scholars and
> practitioners use these texts in support of their sexual
> behavior, because the support is objectively there. But no
> Tantric text implies any but heterosexual relations in its
> corpus. The most recent authentic presentation of the place of
> sexuality in Tibetan Tantrism (1) should suffice as a document
> for the rejection of the esoteric innuendos in Leadbetter's
> writings. H.V. Guenther, of course, is a valid empire of
> Buddhist Tibetan studies in and of himself, and it may not be
> even necessary to quote so exalted a source as his prolific
> writings in order to dismantle the Blavatsky-to-Rampa type
> fraudulence; a very average familiarity with Buddhism would do
> the job.
>
> Mme. Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, a multivolume work, is such a
> melee of horrendous hogwash and of fertile inventions of inane
> esoterica, that any Buddhist and Tibetan scholar is justified to
> avoid mentioning it in any context. But it is precisely because
> serious scholars haven't mentioned this opus that it should be
> dealt with in a serious publication and in one whose readers are
> deeply concerned with the true representation of Tibetan lore.
> In other words, since Blavatsky's work has had signal importance
> in the genesis and perpetuation of a widespread, weird, fake, and
> fakish pseudo-Tibetica and pseudo-Buddhica, and since no
> Tibetologist or Buddhologist would touch her writings with a long
> pole (no pun intended, Blavatsky is a Russian name, the Polish
> spelling would be Blavatski), it behooves an anthropologist who
> works in the Buddhist and Tibetan field to do this job. I don't
> think that more than five per cent, if that many, of the readers
> of Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins' work have ever heard about Blavatsky,
> but Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins must have read them, cover to cover or
> in excerpts -- his whole work reeks of Blavatskyisms; and of
> course, he doesn't quote sources -- fakes never do. Long before
> Rampa, the whole range of quasi-mathematical spheres,
> diagrammatic arrangements, levels of existence of consciousness,
> master-and- disciplehood, hoisted on a style of self-indulgent,
> self-aggrandizing rhetoric, was more or less created by
> Blavatsky. Medieval Christian writers, the Hermetics and a large
> number of kindred thinkers and their products had indeed
> presented a wide vista of quasi-mathematical, impressionistic
> imaginary structures; earlier, of course, Jewish mysticism with
> kabbalistic, Talmudic, and earlier medieval Rabbinical moorings
> might have set the example for the medieval Christian writings of
> this kind, unless the Christian writers were -- or were also --
> inspired by whatever filtered through to them from the Greek and
> Hellenic esotericists, the Pythagoreans and a large number of
> neo-Pythagorean writings spread through the Hellenic world.
> Medieval Christian scholars did not read Greek, and whatever they
> did know about these esoteric systems they obtained through Latin
> translations. Nobody knows to what degree Blavatsky was familiar
> with any of this. As an anthropologist, I believe in the
> perennial possibility of independent invention -- people get
> similar ideas without any necessary mutual communication or
> diffusion. Be that as it may, Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine and
> all the subsequent writings of the Esoteric section of the
> Theosophical Society, later on rechristened "Eastern" to
> forestall criticisms of mystery-mongering and the pervasive
> tendency to identify the esoteric with the erotic, rested heavily
> on such quasi-structural schemes.
>
> I do not doubt that in her earlier years, Blavatsky must have
> been a highly eclectic, voracious reader. But as with all
> nonscholars in the field of religious systems, she did not unmix
> the genuine from the phony; she obviously regarded all sources as
> equally valid. Not knowing any of the primary languages of the
> Buddhist-Hindu tradition, she had to rely on whatever had been
> translated. And, as an epiphenomenon to the awakening interest
> in oriental studies, a large number of unscholarly writings
> emerged, produced by people who thought, or pretended, that they
> could get at the meat of the newly discovered wisdom of the East
> by speculating about it in their own way rather than by being
> guided by its sources, or by seeking guidance from authentic
> teachers in those eastern lands.
>
> Blavatsky, Besant, and the other founders of the Theosophical
> movement were of course familiar with other translations then
> available. The I Ching had just about then been translated into
> French for the first time, though Richard Wilhelm's classical
> translation into English was published after the Secret Doctrine.
> This whole quasi-mathematical, highly self-indulgent speculation,
> of course, was part of the emotional packet of the Renaissance
> and the late Middle Ages in general. There is no doubt that
> esotericism was, always is, a reaction against the official
> ecclesiastical hierarchy and against the official doctrines. In
> India and Tibet, esotericization never took to this kind of
> pseudo-geometrical-mathematical model, since those models were
> already part of the official, scholarly traditions available. In
> these two countries, esotericization used what I call
> psycho-experimentation models, including the erotic, as
> instruments of opposition and criticism of the official religious
> establishments. It is quite obvious that Mme. Blavatsky very
> much identified with this European tradition of opposing the
> occidental religious belief system by esoteric, i.e.
> quasi-mathematical, pseudo-scientific speculations and by
> writings that encompassed diagrammatic representations of a
> secret universe. The Secret Doctrine and much of the older
> "Esoteric" (later "Eastern") sections of the Theosophical Society
> generated a welter of phantasmagoria of a spherical, cyclical,
> graphic overlay type; the vague acquaintance with mandala
> paintings in India added zest to these creations.
>
> I am just not sure whether Mme. Blavatsky read the serious Hindu
> and Buddhist literature in translation and commentary available
> in her days, particularly the Sacred Books of the East, created
> by Max Mueller in the 80's of the last century. If she did,
> little of it showed in her writings. One of the most annoying
> features in the "M Letters" (M for Master) is her use of
> semi-fictitious names, like "H Master K" (Koot Humi). There is,
> of course, no such name in an Indian language or in Tibetan. But
> in the Upanishads, there is a minor rishi mentioned by the
> obviously non-Indo-European name Kuthumi. Just where she picked
> it up I don't know but I suspect she might have seen R.E. Hume's
> Twelve Principal Upanishads which was first published by Oxford
> University Press in the late '80s of the 19th century. The silly
> spelling "Koot Hoomi" was probably due to the occidental mystery
> peddlers' desire to make words sound more interesting by
> splitting them into a quasi-Chinesse series of letters. The
> Master Letters signed "K" are quite clearly Blavatsky's own
> invention; no Indian or Tibetan recluse talks or writes like the
> European feuilleton writer of the early 20th century. In a
> passage, "K" (for Koot Hoomi) criticizes a writer for saying that
> "the sacred man wants the gods to be properly worshipped, a
> healthy life lived, and women loved." "K" comments "the sacred
> man wants no such thing, unless he is a Frenchman." The inane
> stupidity that must have gone into the early converts actually
> believing that an Indian or Tibetan guru would use these European
> stereogibes is puzzling. Yet again mundus vult decipi, and if
> the average Western alien feels she or he can get to the esoteric
> goods, she or he tends to lower the level of skepticism to a
> virtual zero.
>
> The works of Swami Vivekananda appeared at about the same time as
> the Secret Doctrine. Vivekananda knew of, and heartily detested,
> the esotericism of the Theosophical Society; he pronounced his
> disdain at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1892 -- at
> which convention the Theosophists were well represented. But
> while the followers of the Ramakrishna Vivekananda movements as
> well as the followers of most other neo-Hindu and neo-Buddhist
> movements officially decried the esoteric, they and other groups
> marginal to them either blurred that relatively parochial
> rejection of the esoteric, or much more commonly, they blended
> both the esoteric of the Blavatsky type and the Hindu- Buddhist
> reformist of the Vivekananda-Anagarika Dharmapala types into the
> kind of broth which is now solidly ensconced in the
> wisdom-seeking kitchens of the Western world.
>
> Let me now proceed to the arch-paradigm of esoteric phoniness of
> the latter days. ...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 11:28:46 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA09542 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:18:25 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990201171720.13702.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Agehananada Bharati, "Fictitious Tibet" & Mrs Blavatsky
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 09:17:19 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Agehananada Bharati, "Fictitious Tibet: The Origin and
> Persistence of Rampaism", Tibet Society Bulletin, Vol. 7, 1974
>
> Let me first of all stake my claim and explain some terms in the
> title: an apparently unexterminable tradition of sheer fiction
> taken as holy fact originated in Europe and America slightly
> before the turn of the century -- the brainchild of some fertile
> writers and orators, a number of core tales about inaccessible
> Tibetan and Himalayan mystics took shape in contrivedly esoteric
> writings which gained steady momentum until its culmination in
> Lama Lobsang Rampa's, alias Mr. Hoskins', fantastically
> fraudulent output beginning with The Third Eye and its sequels.
> I call this whole phony tradition "Rampaism" after its phony
> consummator, Rampa- Hoskins, and his all-too-numerous followers
> in North America and Europe. This depressing crowd of partly
> well-meaning, totally uninformed, and seemingly uninformable
> votaries holds something like this as its modal view: that there
> is, somewhere hidden in the Himalayas (invariably mis-stressed on
> the penultimate 'a'), a powerful, mystical, initiate brotherhood
> of lamas or similar guru adepts, who not only know all the
> mysteries of the world and the superworld, who not only
> incorporate and transcend the teachings of Buddhism, Hinduism,
> and Christianity, but who also master all the occult arts -- they
> fly through the air at enormous speeds, they run 400 miles at a
> stretch without break, they appear here and there, and they are
> arch-and-core advisors to the wise and the great who hide these
> ultimate links to supreme wisdom and control. In addition, they
> know all their previous incarnations, and can tell everyone what
> his incarnations were and are going to be. Geographically, the
> area where these supergurus reside is nebulously defined as
> "Tibet," "Himalaya," and it often includes the Ganges and India.
> This, very briefly, is the somewhat autoerotic creed of a large,
> and unfortunately still growing, crowd of wide eyed believers in
> the mysterious East, apropos which my colleague Professor Hurvitz
> at the University of British Columbia sagaciously remarked that
> "for these people, the East must be mysterious, otherwise life
> has no meaning." To put this somewhat less succinctly and more
> technically, the enormous, pervasive alienation of Euro-America
> from the religious themes of the Western world, matched with the
> general disgruntlement, with the superciliously religious in the
> established churches, the surfeit with scientific models which
> seem to generate war and destruction, and most recently the
> proliferating fascination with the exotic for its own sake --
> about which later in greater detail -- all these contribute to
> the desperate quest for ideas, rituals, and promises that are
> different from those of the West, that are distant from the West,
> and that are easily accessible, without any intellectual effort,
> without any discursive input.
>
> Let me now present an historical sketch of the increasing ingress
> of pseudo-Orientalia, and specifically of pseudo-Buddhica and
> pseudo- Tibetica into Europe and America. During my research
> into ideological change in the Buddhist clergy in Sri Lanka in
> 1971, I marveled at a painting in a temple in the southernmost
> part of the island. In a long subterranean corridor, some two
> hundred vignettes depicting the phases of the dharma from its
> inception under the Bodhi-tree in Buddhagaya to the foundation of
> the particular temple, the last one showed a white woman kneeling
> and bowing down before the image of the Tathagata and two monks
> administering sil (the five precepts of Thervada Buddhism) to
> her; behind her, several white men in tropical hats and western
> suits, one of them bearded. These, so the monk who showed me
> around informed me, were Mme. Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott
> embracing Buddhism. This is historically quite correct. The
> well-meaning American Colonel Olcott and the Russian-born Mme.
> Blavatsky, founders of the Theosophical Society, did indeed
> undergo that ceremony of initiation in that shrine in Sri Lanka.
> Annie Besant became a convert to Mme. Blavatsky, rather than to
> Buddhism, about a decade later. Leadbetter and other founding
> members formed the incipient caucus of the Society which still
> survives, albeit in highly modified and in a largely reduced form
> when compared to the initial thrust into the religious
> ideological world of the early 20th century. Now we must
> distinguish between the genuine and the spurious elements in the
> movement as it relates to Buddhism. Annie Besant was no doubt a
> sincere woman; one of the British Empire's most powerful orators,
> cofounder of the Indian National Congress, and a fine mind,
> genuinely annoyed at the inanities perpetrated by and constituted
> in the missionary scene. Col. Olcott was a genuine person, too,
> concerned with human affairs, and strongly cognizant of religious
> options other than those of Christianity. But I think Mme.
> Blavatsky and Leadbetter were frauds, pure and simple. My
> definition of a fraud or phony does not quite coincide with the
> usual dictionary meanings of these terms. A phony does not
> necessarily doubt the theses he or she propounds -- in fact they
> can be full believers themselves. But what makes them phonies is
> their basic attitude of refusal of matching their tenets with
> those of a genuine tradition, and of imitating lifestyles which
> are alien to them, by doing things that superficially look part
> of the lifestyle they imitate, or of imitational lifestyles which
> simply do not exist in any cultural body, except as
> idiosyncrasies. Leadbetter wrote about the kundalini, the secret
> serpent power, and a melee of things exoteric and other which he
> had picked up from Indian sources in early translations. He
> never learned any of the primary languages -- Sanskrit, Pali,
> Tibetan; neither did Besant, Olcott, and Blavatsky. Leadbetter
> was an aggressive homosexual, and there is no doubt in my mind
> that he used his esoteric homiletic to seduce young men -- some
> of them very famous indeed in later days. Now I don't object to
> homosexuality -- I think the Gay Freedom movement is well taken
> and should succeed. But I do object to utilizing bits of
> theological or other religious doctrinal material to support
> one's own aesthetical and sensuous predilections. Hindu Buddhist
> Tantric texts do indeed use sexual models and analogues in their
> esoteric tracts, so it is quite in order if scholars and
> practitioners use these texts in support of their sexual
> behavior, because the support is objectively there. But no
> Tantric text implies any but heterosexual relations in its
> corpus. The most recent authentic presentation of the place of
> sexuality in Tibetan Tantrism (1) should suffice as a document
> for the rejection of the esoteric innuendos in Leadbetter's
> writings. H.V. Guenther, of course, is a valid empire of
> Buddhist Tibetan studies in and of himself, and it may not be
> even necessary to quote so exalted a source as his prolific
> writings in order to dismantle the Blavatsky-to-Rampa type
> fraudulence; a very average familiarity with Buddhism would do
> the job.
>
> Mme. Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, a multivolume work, is such a
> melee of horrendous hogwash and of fertile inventions of inane
> esoterica, that any Buddhist and Tibetan scholar is justified to
> avoid mentioning it in any context. But it is precisely because
> serious scholars haven't mentioned this opus that it should be
> dealt with in a serious publication and in one whose readers are
> deeply concerned with the true representation of Tibetan lore.
> In other words, since Blavatsky's work has had signal importance
> in the genesis and perpetuation of a widespread, weird, fake, and
> fakish pseudo-Tibetica and pseudo-Buddhica, and since no
> Tibetologist or Buddhologist would touch her writings with a long
> pole (no pun intended, Blavatsky is a Russian name, the Polish
> spelling would be Blavatski), it behooves an anthropologist who
> works in the Buddhist and Tibetan field to do this job. I don't
> think that more than five per cent, if that many, of the readers
> of Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins' work have ever heard about Blavatsky,
> but Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins must have read them, cover to cover or
> in excerpts -- his whole work reeks of Blavatskyisms; and of
> course, he doesn't quote sources -- fakes never do. Long before
> Rampa, the whole range of quasi-mathematical spheres,
> diagrammatic arrangements, levels of existence of consciousness,
> master-and- disciplehood, hoisted on a style of self-indulgent,
> self-aggrandizing rhetoric, was more or less created by
> Blavatsky. Medieval Christian writers, the Hermetics and a large
> number of kindred thinkers and their products had indeed
> presented a wide vista of quasi-mathematical, impressionistic
> imaginary structures; earlier, of course, Jewish mysticism with
> kabbalistic, Talmudic, and earlier medieval Rabbinical moorings
> might have set the example for the medieval Christian writings of
> this kind, unless the Christian writers were -- or were also --
> inspired by whatever filtered through to them from the Greek and
> Hellenic esotericists, the Pythagoreans and a large number of
> neo-Pythagorean writings spread through the Hellenic world.
> Medieval Christian scholars did not read Greek, and whatever they
> did know about these esoteric systems they obtained through Latin
> translations. Nobody knows to what degree Blavatsky was familiar
> with any of this. As an anthropologist, I believe in the
> perennial possibility of independent invention -- people get
> similar ideas without any necessary mutual communication or
> diffusion. Be that as it may, Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine and
> all the subsequent writings of the Esoteric section of the
> Theosophical Society, later on rechristened "Eastern" to
> forestall criticisms of mystery-mongering and the pervasive
> tendency to identify the esoteric with the erotic, rested heavily
> on such quasi-structural schemes.
>
> I do not doubt that in her earlier years, Blavatsky must have
> been a highly eclectic, voracious reader. But as with all
> nonscholars in the field of religious systems, she did not unmix
> the genuine from the phony; she obviously regarded all sources as
> equally valid. Not knowing any of the primary languages of the
> Buddhist-Hindu tradition, she had to rely on whatever had been
> translated. And, as an epiphenomenon to the awakening interest
> in oriental studies, a large number of unscholarly writings
> emerged, produced by people who thought, or pretended, that they
> could get at the meat of the newly discovered wisdom of the East
> by speculating about it in their own way rather than by being
> guided by its sources, or by seeking guidance from authentic
> teachers in those eastern lands.
>
> Blavatsky, Besant, and the other founders of the Theosophical
> movement were of course familiar with other translations then
> available. The I Ching had just about then been translated into
> French for the first time, though Richard Wilhelm's classical
> translation into English was published after the Secret Doctrine.
> This whole quasi-mathematical, highly self-indulgent speculation,
> of course, was part of the emotional packet of the Renaissance
> and the late Middle Ages in general. There is no doubt that
> esotericism was, always is, a reaction against the official
> ecclesiastical hierarchy and against the official doctrines. In
> India and Tibet, esotericization never took to this kind of
> pseudo-geometrical-mathematical model, since those models were
> already part of the official, scholarly traditions available. In
> these two countries, esotericization used what I call
> psycho-experimentation models, including the erotic, as
> instruments of opposition and criticism of the official religious
> establishments. It is quite obvious that Mme. Blavatsky very
> much identified with this European tradition of opposing the
> occidental religious belief system by esoteric, i.e.
> quasi-mathematical, pseudo-scientific speculations and by
> writings that encompassed diagrammatic representations of a
> secret universe. The Secret Doctrine and much of the older
> "Esoteric" (later "Eastern") sections of the Theosophical Society
> generated a welter of phantasmagoria of a spherical, cyclical,
> graphic overlay type; the vague acquaintance with mandala
> paintings in India added zest to these creations.
>
> I am just not sure whether Mme. Blavatsky read the serious Hindu
> and Buddhist literature in translation and commentary available
> in her days, particularly the Sacred Books of the East, created
> by Max Mueller in the 80's of the last century. If she did,
> little of it showed in her writings. One of the most annoying
> features in the "M Letters" (M for Master) is her use of
> semi-fictitious names, like "H Master K" (Koot Humi). There is,
> of course, no such name in an Indian language or in Tibetan. But
> in the Upanishads, there is a minor rishi mentioned by the
> obviously non-Indo-European name Kuthumi. Just where she picked
> it up I don't know but I suspect she might have seen R.E. Hume's
> Twelve Principal Upanishads which was first published by Oxford
> University Press in the late '80s of the 19th century. The silly
> spelling "Koot Hoomi" was probably due to the occidental mystery
> peddlers' desire to make words sound more interesting by
> splitting them into a quasi-Chinesse series of letters. The
> Master Letters signed "K" are quite clearly Blavatsky's own
> invention; no Indian or Tibetan recluse talks or writes like the
> European feuilleton writer of the early 20th century. In a
> passage, "K" (for Koot Hoomi) criticizes a writer for saying that
> "the sacred man wants the gods to be properly worshipped, a
> healthy life lived, and women loved." "K" comments "the sacred
> man wants no such thing, unless he is a Frenchman." The inane
> stupidity that must have gone into the early converts actually
> believing that an Indian or Tibetan guru would use these European
> stereogibes is puzzling. Yet again mundus vult decipi, and if
> the average Western alien feels she or he can get to the esoteric
> goods, she or he tends to lower the level of skepticism to a
> virtual zero.
>
> The works of Swami Vivekananda appeared at about the same time as
> the Secret Doctrine. Vivekananda knew of, and heartily detested,
> the esotericism of the Theosophical Society; he pronounced his
> disdain at the Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1892 -- at
> which convention the Theosophists were well represented. But
> while the followers of the Ramakrishna Vivekananda movements as
> well as the followers of most other neo-Hindu and neo-Buddhist
> movements officially decried the esoteric, they and other groups
> marginal to them either blurred that relatively parochial
> rejection of the esoteric, or much more commonly, they blended
> both the esoteric of the Blavatsky type and the Hindu- Buddhist
> reformist of the Vivekananda-Anagarika Dharmapala types into the
> kind of broth which is now solidly ensconced in the
> wisdom-seeking kitchens of the Western world.
>
> Let me now proceed to the arch-paradigm of esoteric phoniness of
> the latter days. ...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 12:22:14 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA16803 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 12:20:58 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Drpsionic@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:19:03 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re:A few questions on a touchy subject...
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 58
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 99-02-01 09:53:42 EST, you write:
<< Where my questions come in, is that a clone is a copy of a person who
already
has a soul/spirit. Interesting puzzle, eh? :)
-Angie C.
>>
That's an easy one.
The clone is nothing more than a copy of the physical body, like a very late
twin. But everything else is part of that new person, not taken from the
original copy.
It's a different soul altogether.
Chuck
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 19:10:55 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA02995 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 18:30:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <94a9e943.36b64439@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:18:01 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Trans-Persnal Psych & Theosophy
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/1/99 4:56:32 AM, Peter wrote:
>> Perhaps it was a mistake to mention Transpersonal Psychology on this
list?>>
I see that Peter now catches the heat for posting something not STRICTLY
orthodox Theosophy. For my part, I have been aware of Transpersonal
Psychology, even read a few articles and used them for a paper in school, but
I haven't had the time to really investigate this field as I would like. Yet
I think it is critical that such things are brought up for discussion.
While I appreciate Dallas' criticisms of transpersonal psychology, I agree
with Peter that it isn't fair to hold them to our standards of completeness
and orthodoxy. First of all, HPB tells us that we ourselves only have the
fragments of a bald outline. Secondly, it seems more prudent to celebrate the
doctrines of Theosophy that ARE making it into the public sphere, and note the
ones that are not -- where we still have work to do, as it were.
Rather than criticism, I would enjoy seeing a fuller discussion of the
doctrines of Transpersonal Psych, what in them could be seen as Theosophical,
and where one might learn more about the field of Transpersonal Psychology. I
am aware of one magazine, I think it is by that name, where Maslow contributed
until his death, and even now leading meditation experts and even Ken Wilber
are regular contributors. Wilber in particular is a philosopher/synthesizer
that, in my opinion, all Theosophists could benefit from.
What other resources are there for learning about this positive movement in
psychology?
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 20:10:56 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA10514 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:41:46 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theos Talk"
Subject: Theos-World Some quoations on Reincarnation and Devachan == Feb 2nd 1999
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 18:40:13 -0800
Message-ID: <000f01be4e55$603c3de0$9a0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Importance: Normal
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Part 1.
THE AREA WHERE REINCARNATION/REEMBODIMENT OCCURS
All worlds...are subject to rebirth again and again.
BHAGAVAD GITA 60
...every atom is alive and has the germ of self-consciousness.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 62
Both I [THE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT] and thou [Man] have passed through
many births, O Harasser of thy foes; mine are known unto me, but
thou knowest
not of thine...For never to an evil place goeth one who doeth
good... Being thus born again, he comes in contact with the
knowledge which belonged to him in his former
body...[and]...striving with all his might, [he] obtaineth
perfection because of efforts continued through many births.
BHAGAVAD GITA 31
This immortal thinker [man]... having such vast powers and
possibilities, all his because of his intimate connection with
every secret part of Nature, from which he has been built up,
stands at the top of an immense and silent evolution. OCEAN of
THEOSOPHY 60
SPIRIT--THE PERCEIVER WITHIN ALL
The Knower is never born, nor dies; nor is it from anywhere,
nor did it become anything. Unborn, eternal, immemorial, this
Ancient is not slain when the body is slain...this Self is hidden
in the heart of man...Understanding this great Lord, the Self,
bodiless in bodies, stable among the unstable, the wise man
cannot grieve.
KATHA UPANISHAD 41
The soul is the Perceiver; is assuredly vision itself, pure and
simple, unmodified, and looks directly upon ideas. For the sake
of the soul alone, the Universe exists. YOGA SUTRAS of PATANJALI
24
JUSTICE AND EQUITY RULE THE UNIVERSE -- KARMA
Each man's life, the outcome of his former living is. The
bygone wrongs bring forth sorrows and woes, the bygone right
breeds bliss.
LIGHT of ASIA (Bk 8, p. 143)
WHAT AND WHO IS "MAN," "SPIRIT," "LAW" ?
Man is an immortal soul. All nature is sentient. Down to the
smallest atom, all is soul and spirit, ever evolving under the
rule of law, which is inherent in the whole. Nature exists for
no other purpose than the soul's experience. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY
p. 2
"...this universe [is] for the experience and emancipation of
the soul, for the purpose of raising the entire mass of
manifested matter up to the stature, nature, and dignity of
conscious god-hood. The great aim is to reach self-consciousness
by and through the perfecting after transformation of the whole
mass of matter as well as what we now call soul. The aim for
present man is his initiation into complete knowledge. As to the
whole mass of matter, the doctrine is that it will all be raised
to man's estate when man has gone further on himself.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 62-3
All the matter which the human Ego gathered to it retains the
stamp or photographic impression of the human being, the matter
transmigrates to the lower level when given an animal impress by
the ego.
OCEAN THEOSOPHY p. 68
THE FIELD OF EVOLUTION AND EXPERIENCE
We are not appearing for the first time when we come upon this
planet; but have pursued a long, an immeasurable course of
activity and intelligent perception on other systems of globes.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 2-3
Thou art THYSELF, the object of thy search.
VOICE OF THE SILENCE p. 23-4
Man is a spiritual being. The Ego of each man is immortal,
reappearing clothed in bodies, on each occasion different, it
only appears to be mortal; it always remains the substratum and
support for the personality acting upon the stage of life.
ECHOES p. 8
At every conceivable point in the Universe there are 'lives;'
nowhere can be found a spot that is dead; and each 'life' is
forever hastening onward to higher evolution. ECHOES p. 9-10
Reincarnations is the pilgrimage of our own nature...the end to
be reached is self-dependence with perfect calmness and
clearness. ECHOES p. 32
When a being dies, he emits, as it were, a mass of force or
energy, which goes to make up the new personality when he shall
have reincarnated. In this energy is found the summation of the
life just given up. ECHOES p. 36
The life of man is held to be a pilgrimage... Starting from the
great ALL, radiating like a spark from the central fire, he
gathers experience in all ages, under all rulers, civilizations
and customs, ever engaged in a pilgrimage to the shrine from
which he came. He is now the ruler and now the slave; to-day at
the pinnacle of wealth and power, to-morrow at the bottom of the
ladder, perhaps in abject misery, but ever the same being.
ECHOES p. 31
The end to be reached is self-dependence with perfect calmness
and clearness ... (the) whole life is a persistent pursuit of
the fast-moving soul, which, although appearing to stand still,
can outdistance the lightening. ECHOES p. 32-3
RECOGNITION OF LOVED ONES ON REBIRTH
...recognition cannot depend, in the spiritual and mental life,
on physical appearance...those who are like unto each other, and
love each other will be reincarnated together, whenever
conditions permit. Recognition depends on inner sight, and not
on outward appearance.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 71-2
When we come again, we do not take up the body of someone else,
nor another's deeds; but, are like an actor who plays many
parts...the great life of the soul is a drama, and each new life
and rebirth, another act in which we assume another part.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 74
The friends and relatives which are life unto each other must
incarnate together until, by reason of differentiation of
character, they cannot undo the law of attraction [and so]
remain in company. Not unless and until they become different do
they separate from each other.
ECHOES p. 45
Those whom you help will help you in other lives. The very
moment we come near to where they are, they at once extend
assistance...Thus the members of the whole human family
reciprocally act on one another. ECHOES. p. 45-6
MIND IS RE-EMBODIED
The powers of mind and the laws governing its motion, its
attachments, and its detachments show that its reembodiment must
be here...To permit the involved entity to transfer itself to
another scene before it had overcome all the causes drawing it
here and without having worked out its responsibilities to other
entities would be contrary to the powerful forces which
continually operate upon it.
Ocean of Theosophy. p. 79
ONE LIFE INADEQUATE FOR FULL EXPERIENCE
One short human life gives no grounds for the production of the
inner nature...The soul must be reborn until it has ceased to set
in motion the cause of rebirth, after having developed character
up to its possible limit when every experience has been passed
through.
Ocean of Theosophy p. 81
There is a vast range of powers latent in man, which may be
developed if opportunity be given. Knowledge, infinite in scope
and diversity, lies before us. We have high aspirations with no
time to reach up to their measure, while the passions and
desires, selfish motives and ambitions, war with us and among
themselves. All these have to be tried, conquered, used,
subdued. One life is not enough for this.
Ocean of Theosophy p. 82-3
SENSE OF IDENTITY
Each feels he has an individuality of his own, a personal
identity which bridges over gaps made by sleep, and temporary
lesions in the brain. This identity never breaks from beginning
to end of life in the normal person, and only the persistence and
eternal character of the soul will account for it. Ocean of
Theosophy p. 82
Inherent ideas, common to the whole race, are due to
recollection of such ideas implanted in the human mind at the
very beginning of its evolutionary career by those Brothers and
sages who were perfected in former ages long before the
development of this globe began.
Ocean of Theosophy p. 87
The images made in the "Astral Light" (an imponderable, tenuous
medium which inter-penetrates the entire globe, and in which the
acts and thoughts of every man are felt and impressed, to be
afterward reflected again) persist for centuries...upon returning
to earth-life we are affected for good or evil by the conduct,
the doctrine and the aspirations of preceding nations and men.
ECHOES p. 5
Since we are made up of a mass of lives, our thoughts and acts
affect those atoms or lives, and impress them with a dharma
[duty] of their own. ECHOES p. 40
Each man is seen as a fashioner of the fate for his next
fleeting earth personality...in his own hand is the decree...No
one but ourselves punishes or rewards in this or any life.
ECHOES p. 44 - 45
The nature of each incarnation depends upon the balance as
struck of the merit and demerit of the previous life or
lives--upon the way the man has lived and thought; and this law
is inflexible and wholly just.
EPITOME p. 23
That which is known as 'you' is the result of one continuous
existence of an entity. Your present body and your soul (or the
personality) are the results of a series of co-existence. The
Individuality, or spirit, is the cause of the Soul, and
personality, or what is called 'you.' You are the manifestation
of an entity and are the result of many appearances of that
entity upon the stage of action in various personalities.
W.Q.J. ARTICLES Vol. II p. 452
MEMORY AND REBIRTH
Memory of a prior life does not prove we passed through that,
nor is non-remembering an objection. We forget the greater part
of the events of the years and days of this life. The entire
effect on the character is kept and made a part of ourselves.
The whole mass of detail is preserved in the inner man to be one
day fully brought back when we are perfected. All are subject to
the limitations imposed on the Ego by the new brain in each life.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p 76
By living according to the dictates of the Soul, the brain may
at last be made porous to the Soul's recollections...We should be
very miserable if the deeds and scenes of our former lives were
not hidden from our view until by discipline we became able to
bear a knowledge of them.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 76
FUNCTION OF THOSE WHO GRADUATE ON EARTH
The most intelligent being in the universe, man, has
never...been without a friend, but has a line of "elder brothers"
who continually watch over the progress of the less progressed,
preserve the knowledge gained, and continually seek for
opportunities of drawing the developing intelligence of the race
to consider the great truths concerning the destiny of soul.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 3
The Elder Brothers of humanity are men who were perfected in
former periods of evolution ... when, out of the Great Unknown,
there came forth the visible universes (which)...are eternal in
their coming and going. The object of these mighty waves is the
production of perfect Man, the evolution...after the struggle to
acquire piety, of the soul which consists in knowing God, and
injuring none, such a soul becomes all intelligence. OCEAN of
THEOSOPHY p. 6
The course of evolution is the drama of the soul. There are
beings in the universe whose intelligence is as much beyond ours,
as ours exceeds that of the black beetle; and, who take an
active part in the government of the natural order of things.
OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 2
Nature intends us to use the matter which comes into our bodies
and astral body for the purpose among others, of benefiting the
matter by the impress it gets from association with the human
Ego...it retains the stamp or photographic impression of the
human being; the matter transmigrates to the lower level when
given an animal impress by the Ego. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p.
68
The most exalted beings still in the flesh are known as Sages,
Rishis, Brothers, Masters. The process of evolution up to
reunion with the Divine is and includes successive elevation from
rank to rank of power and usefulness...the process of spiritual
development (includes)...entire eradication of
selfishness...cultivation of broad, generous sympathy in, and
effort for the good of others...cultivation of the inner,
spiritual man by meditation...control of fleshly appetites and
desires...careful performance of every duty. EPITOME p.
24-25
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 1 21:10:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA13170 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:12:57 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:02:44 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
I am interested in obtaining a copy of this article, "Koot Hoomi Unveiled,"
apparently from 1883/4 or so. Please send any information to my personal
email address.
I have also noted David Green's posting of the first part Agehananada Bharat's
article in Tibet Society Bulletin, and I will attempt to respond to his
vitriolic accusations against HPB in my dissertation, "Blavatsky and
Buddhism." I have been collecting mounds of evidence that Theosophy has
extremely close ties to several schools of Tibetan Buddhism -- closer than
even her most careful observers have noted.
It is my opinion, soon to be written up as a body of FACTS, that despite
misspellings and mis-translations, HPB was accurately reporting authentic
Buddhist wisdom and traditions.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 04:11:09 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA16196 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 03:33:40 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: LeonMaurer@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 04:31:53 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World No Subject, No Object
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 54
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Bart
In a message dated 1/27/99 3:23:23 AM, bartl@sprynet.com writes:
>LeonMaurer@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> Here's a contribution to the study of consciousness that may serve to
>> open up some new lines of inquiry.
>>
>> According to Malcolm Brown in a New York Times article (Tuesday, July 22,
>> 1997), Dr. Nicolas Gisin of the University of Geneva in a recent experiment
>> has demonstrated that paired particles at a great distance apart are in
>> communication with each other and make identical decisions instantaneously
>> when faced with a similar choice. This implies that the communication
>> between the particles traveled faster than the speed of light.
>
> There are other explanations.
Yes, but, there is only ONE correct explanation. As an analogous example;
When a modulated electromagnetic field of one "carrier" frequency transfers
its modulations (by induction) to a coadunate field of another carrier
frequency, the induced modulations in the second field appear instantaneously.
Therefore the apparent time of the exchange of information from one field to
the other would appear to be far faster than the speed of light. Actually, in
the case of the split particles, there wouldn't actually be any choice, since
the change of direction or momentum would be governed by the change induced by
one particle (the sender) by a common field distortion--since both split
particles (actually a split wave front) would be linked to each other as well
as to the initiating particle through their common, non local zero-point-
instant. i.e., In the quantum particle case described by Gisin, the split
photon particles, traveling though the non local zero-point fields would be
coadunate with their zero-point-instant of origin and, therefore, would react
instantaneously upon transmission of change information (a distortion of their
common field pertaining to velocity or direction of motion) from one split
particle to the other. This, in effect, would appear to be instantaneous
"action at a distance" (which occurs far quicker than light could travel the
smallest measurable distance between the particles).
Essentially, this information would be transferred through the higher
dimensional (higher frequency order) zero-point fields. This implies that the
zero-point (astral, mental, consciousness) field vibrations, at their natural
frequencies, are far faster by many orders than the highest energy
electromagnetic waves, with their corresponding "time" constants shortened
accordingly--and, thereby, can propagate far faster than the speed of sidereal
light. Because all fields originate from and are harmonics of one primal
field--that original field must be vibrating at a frequency close to
infinite--since it originates out of fundamental abstract spin in the primal
"emptiness" prior to the first manifestation of the Logos. Therefore, the
fields of consciousness (or spirit) would have far higher frequencies and
shorter time constants, than the fields of matter.
But such a "neo-physics" viewpoint, based solely on field laws (cycles) rather
than particle laws, may yet be far over the heads of most contemporary
physicists (let alone non scientifically minded theosophists:-)... But,
nevertheless, it's perfectly consistent with the theosophical teachings
pertaining to fundamental principles, states of consciousness, seven fold
nature, psychic powers, unity of all fields, etc. (See: Universal Energy
Field Diagram at:
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
)
I suspect, it won't be long before the geo-mathematical as well as subjective
"proofs" of the ABC field theory will become so evident, that science will
jump on the bandwagon and claim they knew it all the time. But, as they are
the gurus of this age, their acceptance and acknowledgment that such higher
energy fields exist, could eventually serve to swing theosophy back into the
mainstream of popular thought and, hopefully, action.
>
>> However, the experiment may have proven much more than is apparent at
>>first glance. Here is one analysis of the results that may possibly lead us
>> to a new theory of consciousness as well as to a further understanding of
>>the mechanisms of conscious awareness (that is partially explained by my
>> ABC* theory) and may add a new wrinkle linking classical physics with
>> quantum mechanics.
>
> Actually, not with the current scientific paradigm. The current
>scientific paradigm requires the removal, as far as is possible, from
>the factor of consciousness entering any experiment, which more or less
>guarantees that scientists will never find it.
Correct. But, I am speaking of an entirely new paradigm. And, we're almost
there--even though established "Science" doesn't quite know it yet. (Although
some scientists working in sub-quantum field theories are getting pretty
close.) Currently, "new" post-guantum theoretical physics, or as I call it,
"sub-quantum physics"--particularly quantum cosmology and its "Super String"
and "M-brane" theories dealing with 11 dimensions and zero=point energy fields
("perturbations of the Vacuum"), along with new theories of "quantum
fields"--opens the door to eventually mathematically linking the frequencies,
wave lengths, octaves, etc. of the "zero-point energy" fields (containing
higher mind-memory-consciousness) with the lower "matter-energy" quantum
fields--through the intermediate astral fields.
How this is to be proven is quite a problem--but not insurmountable once
science realizes that, in Nature, all 3-dimensional holographic, or any analog
image information, must be transferred from one field to another by means of
the wave laws rather than the particular particle (quantum) laws prevailing in
any given field-frequency order or field phase. This realization (which I
think the scientists working on chaos, simplicity and complexity theories
already have some inkling of) will take us to the next step of examining these
intermediate fields, both subjectively and objectively, and explaining their
source, interrelationships, and transform characteristics--by using timeframe
animated 3-D computer graphics image (CGI) transformational analysis (which I
am currently working on).
Eventually Science will have to accept this new sub-quantum coenergetic field
paradigm, and jump off from the now classical quantum world--as the earlier
classicists did when modern theories of relativity, and indeterminacy came
along--and focus on the fields and the waves rather than the particles. (i.e.
"keep their eye in the hole and not on the donut," so to speak:-) (How else
will we someday invent the "Holodeck", the "Phaser", and the "Real McCoy"
healing wand?:) :) ;)
>
> In any case, the current popular explanation is that when action is
>taken against the first particle, another is created moving backwards in
>time, back to the creation of the two particles, and that is what causes
>the 2nd particle to change.
The "popular" explanation, like all of contemporary physicalist (or should I
say materialist?) Science, tells only part of the story. They forget that
time, as a "measure of change," occurs only on the level of "fields" imbued
with constantly changing image patterns and wave propagation times. Negative
time is just a mathematical artifact of quantum physics to explain the
particle mechanics of what essentially is the propagation of a wave as it
returns from a reflective surface and creates interference patterns that
holographically image the exact point of origination. Much like the circular
waves that expand from a dropped stone in water and reflect back from the
shore. When the outgoing wave meets the incoming wave, the directional
information carried by both waves merge, form an "interference pattern" that
can holographical reconstruct and locate the "image" of the origin point.
Sure, it takes time (depending on the time constant of the particular field)
for energy waves to travel, but when differently sourced waves meet and form
an interference pattern, the information carried by one wave field is
transferred instantly to the other. According to the ABC field theories now
proposed, there is no actual moving backwards in time. What they are seeing
on the physical plane is actually just the shortening of the time constant in
each successive higher frequency order of the ascending "coenergetic" zero-
point "consciousness" fields.
Hope all this clears the air a bit, (if it doesn't bog us down in the mud made
of holistic thought waves crashing against masses of clumped up brain
particles.:-)
Best wishes,
LHM
>
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 07:11:47 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA16355 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 06:42:03 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Trans-Persnal Psych & Theosophy
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 12:41:21 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be4ea9$564737a0$b25895c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <94a9e943.36b64439@aol.com>
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Rich,
I don't have a sense that that I have caught any heat for my posting. I do
feel, as you and Martin have said, that these positive stirrings in other
fields of knowledge are valuable and to be encouraged.
In terms of resources that you ask about. I believe the journal you are
refering to is The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology which can be obtained
through most university libraries. It is published by:
The Association for Transpersonal Psychology
P.O. Box 3049
Stanford, California 94309
Their web address is
http://www.igc.org/atp/index.html
There is also the Institute of Transpersonal Psychology (in USA) which runs
Masters Degree and PhD courses in TP.
There is a Transpersonal Psychology Section of the British Psychological
Society in the UK. There are many organisations devoted to TP around the
world.
My own background in TP is as a psychotherapist, though I have been a
student of HPB for far longer. I find the work of TP helpful in the
supervising and training of therapists, particularly those who come from a
traditional background of psychology/psychotherapy. For it allows one to
present spiritual perspectives couched within familiar terms. It 'can' also
provide some people with a understandable and achievable 'next step' in
incorporating the spiritual perspective in their work. I did some training
last year on a psychotherapy foundation course and used many of the ideas
from the SD relating to "SPACE", "the circle and central point",
Transcendence & Immanence, NON-Being etc.. but I presented them using models
drawn from transpersonal psychology (eg Assagioli's Egg Diagram). My sense
was that the group were deeply touched by these teachings and their direct
relation to working with other people, in a way they wouldn't have been if I
had simply taught to them from the Secret Doctrine.
To be honest I would much rather be involved in a study of the SD than
transpersonal psychology, any day. But I have learnt, greatly helped
through my work as a therapist, that I need to start from where people are,
and not from where I want them to be. The task seems to be to stir, to
engage the 'inner knowing', that spark in each of us that thirsts for a
'deeper understanding' of life... and then it doesn't so much matter about
the terminology as encouraging and keeping alive that 'flame of
understanding' which becomes the true guide for the other person, indeed for
each of us.
Best wishes,
Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of
> Richtay@aol.com
> Sent: 02 February 1999 00:18
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Theos-World Trans-Persnal Psych & Theosophy
>
>
>
> In a message dated 2/1/99 4:56:32 AM, Peter wrote:
>
> >> Perhaps it was a mistake to mention Transpersonal Psychology on this
> list?>>
>
> I see that Peter now catches the heat for posting something not STRICTLY
> orthodox Theosophy. For my part, I have been aware of Transpersonal
> Psychology, even read a few articles and used them for a paper in
> school, but
> I haven't had the time to really investigate this field as I
> would like. Yet
> I think it is critical that such things are brought up for discussion.
>
> While I appreciate Dallas' criticisms of transpersonal psychology, I agree
> with Peter that it isn't fair to hold them to our standards of
> completeness
> and orthodoxy. First of all, HPB tells us that we ourselves only have the
> fragments of a bald outline. Secondly, it seems more prudent to
> celebrate the
> doctrines of Theosophy that ARE making it into the public sphere,
> and note the
> ones that are not -- where we still have work to do, as it were.
>
> Rather than criticism, I would enjoy seeing a fuller discussion of the
> doctrines of Transpersonal Psych, what in them could be seen as
> Theosophical,
> and where one might learn more about the field of Transpersonal
> Psychology. I
> am aware of one magazine, I think it is by that name, where
> Maslow contributed
> until his death, and even now leading meditation experts and even
> Ken Wilber
> are regular contributors. Wilber in particular is a
> philosopher/synthesizer
> that, in my opinion, all Theosophists could benefit from.
>
> What other resources are there for learning about this positive
> movement in
> psychology?
>
> Rich
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 12:53:28 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA20629 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 12:30:14 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-WebTV-Signature: 1
ETAtAhQmo2NNJEY5j7ZLo6KkTMsHDNSpnQIVAKMsw6nQghXjOEi0hpogdSPTCz0a
From: theo73@webtv.net (dorothy lord)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 10:29:38 -0800 (PST)
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: Cloning
Message-ID: <6156-36B74412-1604@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
In-Reply-To: Drpsionic@aol.com's message of Mon, 1 Feb 1999 13:19:03 EST
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
When a physical body is cloned - thats just what you get - a physical
body
There is no power in cloning to instill a spiritual soul in the
duplicate body.
You have a soulless, mindless body.
In short - a Zombie...
Dorothy
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 15:05:49 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA05161 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:57:08 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: Trans-Persnal Psychology -- its coverage
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:57:13 -0800
Message-ID: <001701be4ef6$fdb0db20$a30e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
In-Reply-To: <000601be4d64$672b1e60$d55d95c1@et.u-net.com>
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 2nd
Dear Peter
I am in no way competent to compare or gripe at Trans-personal
Psychology. At best I am interested in its basic tenets to see
how they compare with the theosophical ones. That would be of
interest for students in general.
Your comments are most valuable and I would like to see some more
in the way of comparison with Theosophical propositions.
It is good to know that this is developing - probably represents
the growing tip of some appreciation of the Theosophical (and
universal teachings and ideas).
Thanks and best wishes,
Dal
======================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 15:11:58 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA05113 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:56:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theosophy Study List"
Subject: Theos-World RE: theos-l digest: February 01, 1999 == What is the purpose of Theosophy ? What did HPB do ?
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:56:35 -0800
Message-ID: <001201be4ef6$e8158b80$a30e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
In-Reply-To:
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 2nd
Dear Christine:
I think I understand what you say when you speak of your reaction
to some of HPB's statements. In many cases she makes statements
that I found to be "explained" in another part of her writings -
and that can be exasperating, as it makes one wait for a long
time in some cases for a reasonable answer.
Theosophy isn't a "quick study."
But I have found that when she writes, she does explain away so
many of the current gaps in knowledge and information that I have
become convinced that Theosophy covers our information needs with
great reasonableness - not so that we will "believe" blindly, but
rather that we may trust it, and still have the latitude and the
need to "find out" for ourselves. I think that it encourages the
attitude of "attention" and "constant vigilance" and does not
reject these. In that sense it is not a "belief" system that
demands blind adherence to "authority." There is a vast
difference between stating facts that one knows and insisting
that others adopt their expression even if they do not
understand. Theosophy rejects such a concept and demands
individual investigation as a vigorous part of learning.
>From that point of view it does not conform with the normal
concept of a "religion." But, is we look at "religion" as the
binding together of people and ideas, then what it does (for me)
is to encourage me to discover if its propositions are facts. So
I reach out to anyone who has concepts similar or opposed to
mine.
You might call it a "do it yourself religion." In that case it
assumes the position of philosophy and science, as both logic and
observation
(and truth in reporting) are essential to it as a "whole."
HPB made no claims for herself, only that she was a
"transmitter." And the transmission consisted in information
which ancient Sages (who had taught themselves about Nature and
her workings long, long ago) felt it necessary for anyone of us
to know about. (see SD I 272-3 for a description of this method
of study.)
>From that point of view it is the presentation of a course in the
study of Nature and of one's self and of others. It tends to
universalize and impersonalize, so as to avoid any hard and fast
ideas that stem from a personal bias -- of one or a few
individuals.
So, pursuing this, one can see that some things become clearer
and others seem darker, and we are left to distinguish between
both, without any coercion.
The value of a "chat" group such as this is that we can share
what we discover and by comparison we can secure a greater
assurance of accuracy.
The main thrust of Theosophy is that our Consciousness and
Intelligence are the result of our being, at core, an eternal
being - a PERCEIVER - a Unit Ray of the ONE UNIVERSAL
ABSOLUTENESS. As we travel through time and experience, we
reincarnate. The Universe in its operative and evolutionary
progress has provided vast and infinitely sensitive plans of
operation, and these strict rules of cooperation involve every
aspect of living Nature and all is components.
Our physical, emotional, mental and "spiritual" aspects
(principles) are a part of the living tools of which the whole
Universe is formed, from the minutest sub-atomic particle to the
grates range of SPACE. We Perceive these, living and operating
around and in us - as our bodies are made of the living, basic
Life-Atoms of nature.
We, as Perceivers, are Life-Atoms that have acquired
self-consciousness over an enormously long evolution, and we are
now proceeding to the acquirement of that experience and
knowledge that will enable us to see the most minute, as well as
the grandest aspects of the whole Universe. This is not a
process that binds us to blind-belief but rather, it s free, and
interiorly, innately, we know we are free beings. We are in the
process of self-consciously accelerating that capacity.
Time is not a factor. Our character and innate natures are
evidence of the experience we have stored. Our present life is
evidence of the lessons we can learn now, as well as the good and
the bad things we have done in the past ( of this life, as well
as of past lives). And that is called in general Karma. [ Karma
is thus the Laws that rule the Universe or a solar system, and
the adjustments that pursue an individual who knowingly or
unknowingly breaks the rules of brotherhood and compassion. ]
All these facts, we can verify by carefully reviewing them in our
minds and determining how much we know and what additional areas
we need to become competent in.
We are presented with a tangible "Goal." It is the acquirement
of all the knowledge and wisdom that he entire Univese offers.
This is mind-boggling to our brain-mind as we know we do not have
time in any one life to encompass such a goal. But if we take
the idea of immorality for the REAL MIND - the eternal Pilgrim,
called sometimes the HIGHER EGO in us, then we can see that
reincarnations and a string of personalities is like a series of
"days" experiences at a school - the vast School of Life.
I hope this may be of some service to you in understanding the
difference between a teaching and a "teacher" - such as HPB was.
She did not come to present those ideas to any one religion,
nation, science, or a group of academics. She came to offer them
to mankind so that any one, with any background, could think
about them and then see if they were reasonable and worth using
for themselves.
She is thus the despair of the academics who limit themselves to
a specific area of study. Theosophy being universal in the past,
draws for its modern expression, words and ideas that can be
traced to older religions and philosophies, and because it is
ageless, it mixes up the key words so as to emphasize key ideas
that are common in all of them. Theosophy in its modern
presentation can be read and understood by those whose background
may derived from any of the great religious, philosophical or
scientific fields.
I do hope this proves to be of some us.
Best wishes, as always,
Dallas
==============
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 16:21:15 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA13914 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 16:01:26 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: Theos-World Re: Cloning
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:00:45 -0000
Message-ID: <000101be4ef7$7bad5bc0$df5795c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <6156-36B74412-1604@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi Dorothy,
You wrote,
> There is no power in cloning to instill a spiritual soul in the
> duplicate body.
That's a good point, Dorothy. It brought a few questions to mind for me.
I'm wondering if we can make the same statement about the sex act, or test
tube fertilization? There is no power in either of these to instill a
spiritual soul in the physical body. Could we say then, that this power
resides somewhere else and is something that happens at some point after the
physical act (whether 'natural' or 'un-natural').
We could say that every physical body around the very earliest stages of
formation actually is souless, and it has the potential to remain soul-less
throughout it's life time if the inner alignment of reincarnating Ego and
body does not take place.
If this is a valid way to look at it then 'how the initial growth of the
physical body is initiated' may be of secondary importance to understanding
what brings the 'inner alignment' about and at what point in the life cycle
this occurs.
What do you reckon?
Best wishes,
Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of dorothy lord
> Sent: 02 February 1999 18:30
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Cloning
>
>
> When a physical body is cloned - thats just what you get - a physical
> body
> You have a soulless, mindless body.
> In short - a Zombie...
> Dorothy
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 21:53:11 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA00893 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:53:51 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990203133213.008b3d70@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 13:32:13 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is
the SOUL = the MIND
In-Reply-To: <000201be4bbc$63a44f40$a40e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
References: <19990129091803.06043098.in@u-n-i.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dallas wrote:
>
>Since thinking involves the whole of man's perceptions, no aspect
>of life, memory or anticipation is devoid of this faculty IN
>ACTION. It is the power to perceive, It is the Self-identifying
>feeling of Ego-ship.
>Descartes said is succinctly: "I think, therefore I am."
>
>Does this help ?
>
>From the Commentary on the Bardo Thodrol:
"....This introduces the ultimate reality of nirvana, the Great Perfection,
the Truth realm, the final freedom, the evolutionary perfection of
Buddhahood. This realisation is the aim of all the teachings of the Book of
Natural Liberation. It is accessible in principle because it is already the
deepest reality of the present, the actual condition of even the most
ordinary. You must look 'nakedly' at yourself, reversing the aim of seeing
back upon itself. You look for that fixed, independent, isolated self that
feels like the kernel within you, out of which your drives and thoughts
emerge. But when you turn 180 degrees to look within the looking, you find
nothing that has intrinsic status, nothing standing independent in its own
right.
Even Descartes found that too: he found that he could find nothing at the
point of origin of thought. He erroneously asserted that it was because a
subject could not be an object. And he then went wild and said that this
subject, this one thing he could not find, demonstrate, establish in any
way, was the one thing he could be foundationally certain of! He could
doubt everything, but he could not doubt that he doubted! So; I think,
therefore I am. Only the laziest Buddhist philosopher would make such a
statement"
Dallas, you're not lazy are you?
Regards
Darren
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 2 23:03:32 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id WAA11183 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 22:52:43 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 23:47:01 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Cloning
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/2/99 6:53:09 PM, Dorothy wrote:
<>
I strongly doubt this. If the developed clones were viable organisms, meaning
they could breathe on their own etc., I strongly suspect karma would find
souls that could inhabit them, at least some of them. We are taught in the
SECRET DOCTRINE (and I know it's a controversial teaching) that several
million years ago, man mated with animals and produced the various breeds of
apes. One would think that these would have been sterile and soulless
offspring, but in fact we are taught that some souls entered these ape bodies,
and became spiritually and intellectually delayed.
Likewise, cloning will very likely produced viable, "inhabited" human bodies.
I think the process is about as horrendous as mating with animals, but I think
it's going to happen, and souls will enter those bodies, and it will be a
karmic mess. Imagine science cloning duplicates of anyone who could pay for
it, keeping the clones in a coma, and harvesting their organs whenever those
of the "investor" began to fail. Not only would the "investors" be less
inclined to live a healthy life, the clones would be mercilessly butchered
without ever having really live. This is a kind of "adult abortion" and
certainly a horrendous use of our biological knowledge. This kind of
technology and abuse is what HPB says brought down the vast civilizations of
Atlantis.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 06:53:19 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA15534 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 06:15:00 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 12:14:22 GMT
Message-Id: <199902031214.MAA21227@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Richard,
You wrote:
>It is my opinion, soon to be written up as a body of FACTS, that despite
>misspellings and mis-translations, HPB was accurately reporting authentic
>Buddhist wisdom and traditions.
... mispellings and mis-translations......
As I understand it, you would like these corrected (so for e.g., as you see
it, scholars may take Theosophy seriously), but do you, when making these
corrections, also consider the "numerical value of the letters composing the
word... &c. &c." referred to in the Subba Row quote? To just look at the
spelling on its own is only one aspect, whereas there are many others to
consider. Once the spelling is altered, the numerical values, &c., &c.
change.
Tony
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 06:58:18 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA14682 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 06:03:28 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: Cloning == Similarity with the production of anthropoids in remote past.
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 05:03:33 -0800
Message-ID: <000001be4f75$9b340c40$9f0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <6156-36B74412-1604@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 3rd
Dear Dorothy:
In the SECRET DOCTRINE the answer is hinted at in Vol. II p. 689
730 318 318fn.
The history of the earlier production of monstrous astral forms
which later on became in the course of descent the "Apes" we know
now is traced in SD II 192, 200-1 683.
Sterility between man and animals was apparently imposed long
back to prevent the trapping of human Egos (souls) in what are
animal bodies and this "sin of the Mindless" recurring. See SD
II 192 195-6 780 799-80.
The SD statements give a survey of pre-history from the
chronology and records preserved by the Adepts And Sages who
witnessed those events when they occurred. While our modern
anthropologists may not take these accounts seriously, the
student of Theosophy who has demonstrated to himself/herself the
validity of many of the propositions that Theosophy offers, may
assume there is some truth to these accounts and statements. End,
read what HPB writes as to historical lining that is associated
with every myth and legend from all over the world in SD I 303-5,
267 (top of the page).
Hope this is of help.
Best wishes,
Dallas.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of
dorothy lord
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 1999 10:30 AM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: Cloning
When a physical body is cloned - thats just what you get - a
physical
body
There is no power in cloning to instill a spiritual soul in the
duplicate body.
You have a soulless, mindless body.
In short - a Zombie...
Dorothy
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 07:01:44 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA16675 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 06:39:32 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the SOUL = the MIND
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 05:39:39 -0800
Message-ID: <000301be4f7a$a6a099e0$9f0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990203133213.008b3d70@ozemail.com.au>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 3rd 1999
Dear Darren:
In this commentary from the BARDO it is not clear as to who is
looking at what. At least that is the impression I get.
Is there not a vast distinction between the inquiring
CONSCIOUSNESS who looks at the EMBODIED CONSCIOUSNESS - our
minds, memories and thoughts of today and yesterday - and say
what are their value in terms of permanency ? In other words in
me (my Mind), I can see that I can look at my memories and think
my thoughts, but I am not bound either by those images of the
past or the actions of the present. I am detached from both.
They exist but I am not forced into any position by them. They
are subordinate. I am the permanent "I".
Do we have two CONSCIOUSNESSES or do we have ONE CONSCIOUSNESS
and two planes (at least) of perception?
What is NIRVANA ? How can it be described, unless some
CONSCIOUSNESS has been there, returned, and then left a
description ? We must logically assume that the "I" when it
enters that state, it severs its connection with the "embodied
Self," and no longer has a basis for involvement in earth life
activities. Why should a blank state be considered bliss? Could
we stand it ? Are we saying that as MINDS we desire to cut of
FEELING and EMOTION ? And, can this be truly done ?
I know that in Hindu and Buddhist thinking the ideal of a
non-essing (deliverance from sin, feeling and sorrow) is
considered superior to earthly life as we know it today. But is
that not a reaction from the power that we all possess, to some
degree, of "putting ourself in the place of another" and enjoying
or suffering along with them - as we picture they must be
enjoying or suffering (if they were using our nature) ?
Is "freedom from hurt and suffering" the only thing to be
achieved by personal progress ? If so, then do we know what
causes suffering ? How do we stop from creating more suffering
for ourselves ? [ I sound like a disciple repeating the Buddha's
4 Paths ] because, the next is: what active steps should we take
to control our lives and actions so as to make ourselves
harmless - and thus bring on a state of karma-less-ness ? {the
Hindus, Jains and Buddhists enjoy discussing such matters and are
very active (those that are interested) in discussing such
philosophical things.
Of what value to us is a state in which we assume it is blissful
if nothing is done or contemplated or felt or contacted ?
Has anyone acquired a greater quality of awareness, attention,
concentration or meditation by entering (even for an hour) a
condition of sense-deprivation ?
I think there is relevance to DESCARTES' statement. Are we not
essentially MIND-BEINGS ? Is the MIND a permanence, a dynamic
investigator, an ever-changing repository of memories ? What is
it ?
Why are we burdened with it ? Why do we imagine that
NOTHING-NESS is a solution to the pain and suffering of embodied
life ? (Which is how NIRVANA is often described.)
Next we could ask are we essentially FEELING-BEINGS ? do we
enjoy the inter-action and inter-relation of our life ? Can we
live without feeling, desire, goals, amusement, and, yes, pain ?
I think the real problem is one of selecting our thoughts,
objectives and actions that result from decision making. Can we
act so as not to hurt ourselves by a future reaction that is
painful ?
Why does a criminal hide his actions and pretend to be virtuous?
Does that not imply he is innately aware that he is doing wrong,
and in order to continue to live in "society" without close
supervision, he has to pretend to be trustworthy ? And, if he
has that innate awareness and knows the difference between right
and wrong, why persist in doing that which is hurtful to others,
and ultimately to himself?
Sorry, I have a lot of questions I have asked myself, and am
trying to trace down useful answers. So far I have found the
propositions of theosophy to be the most valuable.
You may be interested in "No-saying," but I find it more valuable
to ask questions. Perhaps we can all learn from each other by
going forward, not by applying brakes on our thinking - or am I
wrong in understanding what you are driving at ?
I wonder if we are trying to approach the same thing, but perhaps
from different perspectives ?
Dal
=========================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 08:53:18 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA26142 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 08:45:10 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990203144405.12266.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Re: "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 06:44:04 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Tony comments as he most always does on favourite theme-------
>... mispellings and mis-translations......
>As I understand it, you would like these corrected (so for e.g., as you
see
>it, scholars may take Theosophy seriously), but do you, when making
these
>corrections, also consider the "numerical value of the letters
composing the
>word... &c. &c." referred to in the Subba Row quote? To just look at
the
>spelling on its own is only one aspect, whereas there are many others
to
>consider. Once the spelling is altered, the numerical values, &c., &c.
>change.
>
>Tony
Dearest Chela Tony-------
You're constant refrain/mantra is there are no mistakes in Mrs
Blavatsky's writings. No misspellings/typographical errors. None!!!!
Mrs Blavatsky wrote there were mistakes/typos in her material. So you
disagree with Mrs Blavatsky?????? Why can't Mrs Blavatsky's writings
have typos????? ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS!!!! instead of pussyfooting
around, o circular & indirect one.
Where did you obtain such belief???? I'm wasting time asking & you'll
ignore questions or post quotations with your cryptic remarks added
implying your high chelaship.
IMO you do disservice to Theosophy with your bibliolatry. You have
maybe fetish for this literalism?????? Go back to Yahweh and his Old
Testament if you want fetish text.
In background I sense mantra:
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
NONE, NO NONE, NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVE NEVER NEVER.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 10:03:10 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA01344 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 09:58:30 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:57:44 GMT
Message-Id: <199902031557.PAA19234@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear TOTALLY D. GREEN
Why not address the numerical aspect, and Subba Row's comments?
They were offered with genuine concern.
Hebrew letters have numerical equivalents. This is fairly well known.
Subba Row is saying the same in regard to another language.
Does it in your view apply to all languages?
It may be very difficult to begin to understand, but why fob something off,
which we can't understand (?), with a personal attack, and by repeating:
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>
>NONE, NO NONE, NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVE NEVER NEVER.
>
Tony
>Tony comments as he most always does on favourite theme-------
>>... mispellings and mis-translations......
>>As I understand it, you would like these corrected (so for e.g., as you
>see
>>it, scholars may take Theosophy seriously), but do you, when making
>these
>>corrections, also consider the "numerical value of the letters
>composing the
>>word... &c. &c." referred to in the Subba Row quote? To just look at
>the
>>spelling on its own is only one aspect, whereas there are many others
>to
>>consider. Once the spelling is altered, the numerical values, &c., &c.
>>change.
>>
>>Tony
>
>
>Dearest Chela Tony-------
>
>You're constant refrain/mantra is there are no mistakes in Mrs
>Blavatsky's writings. No misspellings/typographical errors. None!!!!
>
>Mrs Blavatsky wrote there were mistakes/typos in her material. So you
>disagree with Mrs Blavatsky?????? Why can't Mrs Blavatsky's writings
>have typos????? ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS!!!! instead of pussyfooting
>around, o circular & indirect one.
>
>Where did you obtain such belief???? I'm wasting time asking & you'll
>ignore questions or post quotations with your cryptic remarks added
>implying your high chelaship.
>
>IMO you do disservice to Theosophy with your bibliolatry. You have
>maybe fetish for this literalism?????? Go back to Yahweh and his Old
>Testament if you want fetish text.
>
>In background I sense mantra:
>
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>THERE ARE NO MISTAKES!!
>
>NONE, NO NONE, NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVE NEVER NEVER.
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 10:18:10 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA02485 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:07:30 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-WebTV-Signature: 1
ETAsAhQBx/vvDcjh/3SFnfAs99gBdX7BrwIUHCLgiNssM+YXudyB/y+V0gfn1Nc=
From: theo73@webtv.net (dorothy lord)
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 08:06:54 -0800 (PST)
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World T0 Eldon Tucker
Message-ID: <26675-36B8741E-12@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
In-Reply-To: Eldon B Tucker 's message of Fri, 11 Dec
1998 07:49:47 -0800
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Sent message on2/2
Subject To Peter
IF NOT RECEIVED WILL SEND AGAIN
Let me know
Gorothy
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 10:33:09 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA04738 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:26:31 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <4.1.19990203082302.00949100@theosophy.com>
X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 08:25:51 -0800
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: Eldon B Tucker
Subject: Re: Theos-World T0 Eldon Tucker
In-Reply-To: <26675-36B8741E-12@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>Sent message on2/2
>Subject To Peter
>IF NOT RECEIVED WILL SEND AGAIN
>Let me know
> Dorothy
You sent your message to owner-theos-talk rather than
to theos-talk by mistake. I've just gotten to reposting
it for you. (It's below.)
-- Eldon
----
>From: theo73@webtv.net (dorothy lord)
>Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 16:50:09 -0800 (PST)
>To: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
>Message-ID: <3217-36B79D41-373@mailtod-222.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Peter
To answer your comments, we would have to bring in the Astral Planes.
Synopsis
When the Ego leaves (dies) he leaces on the Lower Astral plane, all his
misdeeds and selfishthoughts , carrying with him only his unselfish
thoughts and actions to Devachan.
According to Karmic Law all these form the new Astral body which the
reincarnating Ego unites with. Together they enter the womb of an
appropiate mother.
Nature then molds the foetus around the Astral form.
So it would seem the spiritual Soul never leaves the Ego
thru all circumstances.
A clone wouldnt even have an Astral body.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 11:48:09 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA12474 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 11:37:53 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: Theos-World RE: Astral Body and Clones == Do they have a "model form?"
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:37:53 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be4fa4$4fb2c7a0$a90e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <4.1.19990203082302.00949100@theosophy.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 3rd
Dear Dorothy:
How can you think that a physical "clone" would not have an
"astral body ?" In all physial forms it is the foundation for
that form. One of the functions of the "astral body" is to form
a network or a lattice on which the physical molecules can
arrange themselves to make a physical form.
So minerals, plants, animals and humans, in fact everything in
the Universe has first an ASTRAL FORM, and then physical forms of
various densities are aggregated around that. Take a good look
at the able of Kosmic Principles. Then turn to the KEY and take
a good look at those attributed to the Human being. They compare
and correspond.
Were you thinking of the "astral body" as the Personal soul ? If
so, that is an aspect of the Higher Manas which, shoots down and
illuminates the physical brain (in the case of man) in a
progressive manner from babyhood on, by stages of 7 years, until
there is a full incarnation of Manas and full moral
responsibility by age 14/21 (for humans).
In the case of animals the Manas is latent, and the power of the
lower animation poser of nature operations on the principles of
the astral, Prana and Kama operate. Instinct is the
manifestation in a progressive manner of the gradual trend
towards individualization of the animal forms. At least that is
what I get from a study of the principles in the OCEAN OF
THEOSOPHY and the KEY TO THEOSOPHY.
There is so much in those which gives us answers when we seek for
information. And then it stays with us, as memory.
I hope this is of help.
Best wishes,
Dallas
=================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 12:49:18 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA18679 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 12:36:46 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-WebTV-Signature: 1
ETAsAhQ76BPmxfQEfc6CPWAsTBftPW+nrQIUNxWipqFcW9ix0HKg6abdZbIaHQQ=
From: theo73@webtv.net (dorothy lord)
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 10:36:11 -0800 (PST)
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Message-ID: <3898-36B8971B-488@mailtod-221.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dallas& Rich
In the natural order of things of course the
Astral comes first,
So your saying that while the scientist is cloning a physical body - the
astral is also being formed.
Even tho its its goes against Nature, I guess this could be so , even if
man is doing the creating?
Rich -- I was referring only to the Spiritual Soul,
Without question the clone could be inhabitated by a soul roaming the
lower Astral regions & crleate havoc in the world.
Dorothy
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 14:38:00 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA32064 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 14:29:42 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World T0 Eldon Tucker
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 20:29:00 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be4fb3$d5240340$f95695c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <4.1.19990203082302.00949100@theosophy.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi Dorothy,
I 'sort of' agree with what you say below. I wonder about the timing
involved as to when the physical body of the infant is built 'around' the
astral double. Do you think this begins immediately after fertilization?
My own sense is that a certain amount of building work is carried out
first - perhaps over a certain number of weeks - before the Ego 'comes into
incarnation'. This allows time for the basic elemental form to be made
*before* the work of fashioning it to the shape of that particular Astral
Form takes place. There is a case for 'not everything' happening at once,
for HPB states that the Reincarnating Ego doesn't fully 'enter' into the
physical vehicle until around the age of 7 years. Hence the child is deemed
not Karmically responsible until that time.
As to the term "cloning", I wonder whether we (and others) are using the
same meaning? This is something I should have asked *before* adding my 2p's
worth. The more I think about it the more I I realise that I am not
exactly sure how cloning takes place. So, based on my limited knowledge(!)
I am using the term "cloning" to mean a method of artificial insemination
that ensures the growing organism (animal or human) has exactly the same DNA
structure as the body being duplicated. Is this what you mean?
If we both mean something similar then I'm not sure how you reach your
conclusion "that a clone wouldn't have an Astral body". Am I missing
something?
Best wishes,
Peter
> To answer your comments, we would have to bring in the Astral Planes.
>
> Synopsis
>
> When the Ego leaves (dies) he leaces on the Lower Astral plane, all his
> misdeeds and selfishthoughts , carrying with him only his unselfish
> thoughts and actions to Devachan.
>
> According to Karmic Law all these form the new Astral body which the
> reincarnating Ego unites with. Together they enter the womb of an
> appropiate mother.
>
> Nature then molds the foetus around the Astral form.
> So it would seem the spiritual Soul never leaves the Ego
> thru all circumstances.
>
> A clone wouldnt even have an Astral body.
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 15:08:00 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA03123 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 14:55:20 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:50:37 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Re: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/3/99 12:52:57 PM, Tony wrote:
<>
Tony, I confess once again that I really don't get what you're aiming at here,
but I'll take Peter's tack and be nice about it. Subba Row is referring to
actual Sanskrit words, correctly spelled, which can by transformation point to
other Sanskrit words, correctly spelled. This is because Sanskrit, like
Hebrew, Greek, Arabic and other "sacred languages" (languages in which
Scriptures were orally handed down) uses letters for both sounds and numerals.
Mis-spell a word, and you have lost the inner meaning of it.
Of what possible value would it be to publish around mis-spelled words, when
the correct Sanskrit or other spelling is perfectly known? Are you suggesting
that HPB deliberately mis-spelled words in order to communicate in a
numerological code? I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this,
but *only if they include an example or two.* Otherwise it is pure
speculation, and no sound reason to perpetuate ignorance.
I will add that it is a matter of fact that many words HPB spelt phonetically,
particularly Tibetan words like *bDe-wa-can* (Devachan) and *rGyud-sDe* (Kiu-
Ti) because they would be unpronounceable by the layman. Are you suggesting
that her phonetic spellings are equally a numerological code?
Examples?
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 15:13:03 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA03058 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 14:54:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 15:50:32 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Cloning and civilizational disaster
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/3/99 6:49:03 PM, Dorothy wrote:
<>
Dear Dorothy, I'm not *exactly* sure what you mean by "spiritual soul" but I
will assume you mean the Monad. Even in this case, it seems to me entirely
possible that human-evolving Monads could karmically be caused to enter cloned
bodies, tying their spiritual essence to the clone. This seems like a direct
parallel to the creation of the apes, as I and Dallas have been saying.
If these forthcoming clones will be kept in suspended animation for organ-
harvesting, then at least we can assume that the Monad will only be stuck in
such a situation for one lifetime. If the clones are allowed to live and
breed, then the problem grows much worse, and is an exact parallel to the case
of the apes.
This may sound somber, but I truly hope we have some kind of power-
grid/scientific collapse before such experiments go too far. When I look at
signs in our environment (polar caps melting, etc.), our growing reliance on
electrical things, our growing centralization of power conduits where one
computer virus can take down entire power grids -- I do think a large-scale
collapse is coming soon. And it might not be a bad thing, in the *long* view.
We may have over-reached ourselves and it may be time for a cyclical fall.
I am *not* referring to the Y2K problem, which I see as a minor glitch that
will be worked out within a few years. I'm talking about a major
civilizational meltdown: losing all electrical power for months or years (due
to terrorism with the power grid or other unforseen disaster). If this were
to happen -- losing power and a chain-reaction that makes it spread -- it is
important to note that no gas could be pumped (meaning no cars or trucks
bringing in food and supplies), no planes could fly, no satellite
communications could be received, there would be no water sanitation, no
electrical heating systems, no electric lights, no t.v. or radio except with
private generators.
While this would cause untold suffering, I actually think it would be better
than some of the scientific research that is taking place, which creates MUCH
more long-term karma than the scaling-back of our civilization that would take
place following a grid collapse. (I probably sound like a survivalist
radical. I should say for the record that I own no weapons of any kind, nor
have I stock piled food or supplies.)
What does the rest of this list think about the possibility of an electrical
grid collapse, and individual's chances of surviving it? It seems to me
significant that those with solar-powered homes and backyard gardens might do
okay -- and interesting that so many forces are opposed to the development of
solar powered cars and homes, which gets the individual "off the grid" and
self-sufficient.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 16:08:01 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA13256 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 16:04:57 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 22:04:15 GMT
Message-Id: <199902032204.WAA18950@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Re: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Richard
Thanks for your reply, and taking the trouble to explain. It is appreciated
and much more effective to reciting mantras! Subba Row actually refers to
*ancient* Sanskrit, which is most probably rather different to Sanskrit as
seen to-day? (Like ancient Greek, is rather different to modern Greek)?
You would know whether this is the case far better. And by what you say you
sound as if you are open to languages having their cycles like everything else?
>Mis-spell a word, and you have lost the inner meaning of it.
Thanks
Tony
>In a message dated 2/3/99 12:52:57 PM, Tony wrote:
>
><corrections, also consider the "numerical value of the letters composing the
>word... &c. &c." referred to in the Subba Row quote? To just look at the
>spelling on its own is only one aspect, whereas there are many others to
>consider. Once the spelling is altered, the numerical values, &c., &c.
>change. >>
>
>Tony, I confess once again that I really don't get what you're aiming at here,
>but I'll take Peter's tack and be nice about it. Subba Row is referring to
>actual Sanskrit words, correctly spelled, which can by transformation point to
>other Sanskrit words, correctly spelled. This is because Sanskrit, like
>Hebrew, Greek, Arabic and other "sacred languages" (languages in which
>Scriptures were orally handed down) uses letters for both sounds and numerals.
>Mis-spell a word, and you have lost the inner meaning of it.
>
>Of what possible value would it be to publish around mis-spelled words, when
>the correct Sanskrit or other spelling is perfectly known? Are you suggesting
>that HPB deliberately mis-spelled words in order to communicate in a
>numerological code? I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this,
>but *only if they include an example or two.* Otherwise it is pure
>speculation, and no sound reason to perpetuate ignorance.
>
>I will add that it is a matter of fact that many words HPB spelt phonetically,
>particularly Tibetan words like *bDe-wa-can* (Devachan) and *rGyud-sDe* (Kiu-
>Ti) because they would be unpronounceable by the layman. Are you suggesting
>that her phonetic spellings are equally a numerological code?
>
>Examples?
>
>Rich
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 17:23:49 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA21185 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 17:11:00 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990203230952.15559.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 15:09:52 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
R. Taylor------
I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this, but *only if
they include an example or two.* Otherwise it is pure speculation, and
no sound reason to perpetuate ignorance.
TOTALLY D. GREEN------
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
Tony, examples please!!
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 17:43:42 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA24360 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 17:38:09 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990203233702.3929.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 15:37:02 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Tony-------
>Why not address the numerical aspect, and Subba Row's comments?
>They were offered with genuine concern.
>Hebrew letters have numerical equivalents. This is fairly well known.
>Subba Row is saying the same in regard to another language.
>Does it in your view apply to all languages?
>It may be very difficult to begin to understand, but why fob something
off,
>which we can't understand (?), with a personal attack, and by
TOTALLY D. GREEN--------
I'm TOTALLY open to numerical aspect & Subba Row's comments. Mrs
Blavatsky writes similarly. D McDavid wrote on theme in recent American
Theosophist. But---------the reality of what SR and Mrs B wrote on
numerical aspect is TOTALLY separate issue from typos & mistakes in Mrs
B's text. Both can exist.
Personal attack?????? P Bazzer TOTALLY disregards the personality. So
I (TOTALLY nonexistent) cannot attack you (TOTALLY nonexistent)!!!!!!
On personal level I give advice: Don't insult others & in turn others
will not give insults back. Get off high horse & others will give
respect.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 3 21:46:24 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA21629 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 3 Feb 1999 20:46:00 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Bill Dade"
Subject: Theos-World RE: Astral Body and Clones = Do they have a "model form?"
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 19:45:55 -0800
Message-ID: <000201be4ff0$dfedc6c0$290e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <11493-36B89B07-688@mailtod-132.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 3rd 1999
In ISIS UNVEILED Vol. I p. 207 (bottom of page) speaks of flesh
and skin grafted onto another person, which fell off when the
donor died.
This is in regard to universal magnetism and the magnetic
relations to be observed between a donor and the material given.
A link is apparently maintained. Would this not be through the
astral body and the Prana ?
Dallas.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 02:42:57 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id CAA18221 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 02:09:58 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <58fc3b71.36b955a6@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 03:09:10 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Spelling and codes
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/3/99 10:07:40 PM, Tony wrote:
<>
Tony,
I can't speak for truly ancient Sanskrit, meaning any Sanskrit before there
are records. The earliest known Sanskrit is that known in the Vedas, and it
is indeed different from Classical Sanskrit. It is not different in terms of
spelling, but in terms of complexity. It is a fact that the more ancient
Sanskrit is far more complex than later Sanskrit, a fact which would seem to
prove HPB right that early man was more sophisticated than present
circumstances.
However, with rare exceptions spelling is the same in Vedic and in classical
Sanskrit. What makes Vedic different is not different spellings, but far more
verbal systems and a greater vocabulary, as well as a slightly different way
of marking prepositions etc. Greek is in the same case -- Attic Greek, or
Platonic Greek, is mostly different from modern Greek in being more complex,
retaining the subjunctive system, the aorist verbal system, etc.
But I confess I still don't understand your point about spelling and
numerology. I am totally open to numerological codes, but I can't see how
spelling "mistakes" (if that's what they are) can be significant. Again, I am
not advocating changing facsimile texts, but perhaps publishing companion
study guides which would give the accepted spellings of terms, translations,
etc. And again, I think HPB's Glossary was an attempt to do this. I suspect
HPB would be horrified to see some of the errors that have been identified,
and had she the time, she would have corrected them herself.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 06:42:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA12084 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:09:25 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 12:08:48 GMT
Message-Id: <199902041208.MAA02222@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Spelling and codes
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Rich
Thanks for the considered and interesting mail.
Tony
>Tony,
>
>I can't speak for truly ancient Sanskrit, meaning any Sanskrit before there
>are records. The earliest known Sanskrit is that known in the Vedas, and it
>is indeed different from Classical Sanskrit. It is not different in terms of
>spelling, but in terms of complexity. It is a fact that the more ancient
>Sanskrit is far more complex than later Sanskrit, a fact which would seem to
>prove HPB right that early man was more sophisticated than present
>circumstances.
>
>However, with rare exceptions spelling is the same in Vedic and in classical
>Sanskrit. What makes Vedic different is not different spellings, but far more
>verbal systems and a greater vocabulary, as well as a slightly different way
>of marking prepositions etc. Greek is in the same case -- Attic Greek, or
>Platonic Greek, is mostly different from modern Greek in being more complex,
>retaining the subjunctive system, the aorist verbal system, etc.
>
>But I confess I still don't understand your point about spelling and
>numerology. I am totally open to numerological codes, but I can't see how
>spelling "mistakes" (if that's what they are) can be significant. Again, I am
>not advocating changing facsimile texts, but perhaps publishing companion
>study guides which would give the accepted spellings of terms, translations,
>etc. And again, I think HPB's Glossary was an attempt to do this. I suspect
>HPB would be horrified to see some of the errors that have been identified,
>and had she the time, she would have corrected them herself.
>
>Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 06:49:06 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA12099 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:09:29 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 12:08:51 GMT
Message-Id: <199902041208.MAA02238@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>R. Taylor------
>I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on this, but *only if
>they include an example or two.* Otherwise it is pure speculation, and
>no sound reason to perpetuate ignorance.
>
>TOTALLY D. GREEN------
>Tony, examples please!!
Dear David
Hopefully, just repeated the once is enough!
Examples re: "mispellings" have been given before in relation to the
original SD and the BdeZ SD. These two are given in an attempt to
illustrate a point of view.
In the "Occult Catechism" (pp. 11-12 Proem) MANVANTARA is spelt in 2
different ways. These are standardised to the one spelling in the BdeZ SD.
As it was put to me, are they spelled differently, because one is referring
to the ROOT MANU, the other to the SEED MANU?
It is an interesting observation and promotes lines of thought, which
otherwise may have been glossed over.
Some of us study the SD with the approach, why is it spelled differently?
Others that one spelling must be wrong, and thus altering it, as has been
done in the case of the BdeZ SD.
Another e.g., which has been given before: Disk on page 1 (Proem) becomes
disc on page 4. They are given the same spelling in the BdeZ SD.
Disk on page 1 could relate to Kosmos
On page 4 to cosmos, thus the symbols illustrated.
The difference between Kosmos and cosmos is explained on page 3.
Should we be making these alterations to what is clearly seen as mispellings
in the BdeZ edition?
When we make alterations, are we able to cover all the angles? Thus the
remarks/question made to Richard, to which he has given interesting replies,
about the numerological aspect. It seemed, that if we altered the spellings
of the Sanskrit words, etc., it may also alter the numerical values,
something we may very well be ignorant of. And for this reason the concern
about altering them. As I understand it, he is saying by correcting the
spellings (of the Sanskrit) it will be also correcting the numerological
aspects as well.
This mail is certainly not written for reasons of respect, as from previous
experience it can bring the opposite.
It is not written for you to agree with in any way, and can appreciate it
has no place in your approach to Theosophy, and the the study of the
Theosophical writings.
It is just another point of view, and the more points of view there are the
better, but once the writings themselves are altered, it becomes that
persons viewpoint.
Hopefully this makes things clearer?
Tony
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 08:43:15 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA18438 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:02:15 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-WebTV-Signature: 1
ETAsAhRt13ZfdPkzEPSWqAbW3x56mFb3qgIUXRYHfIVuPDRWycDw2sVvbo+6g9w=
From: theo73@webtv.net (dorothy lord)
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 06:01:38 -0800 (PST)
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Astral
Message-ID: <643-36B9A842-698@mailtod-222.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV)
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Ending this speculation on aclones Astral, I venture the theory that
according to the Natural order of things - the Astralbody already
exists. as to the original physical body.
the clone, as an extension of the original would not possess a NEW
astral form.
It seems to go against the natural progression of evolution. Man in his
ignorance creates monsters.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 08:58:49 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA18780 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 08:06:17 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: alpha@dircon.co.uk
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 14:05:35 GMT
Message-Id: <199902041405.OAA01142@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-Sender: alpha@popmail.dircon.co.uk (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>TOTALLY D. GREEN--------
>I'm TOTALLY open to numerical aspect & Subba Row's comments. Mrs
>Blavatsky writes similarly. D McDavid wrote on theme in recent American
>Theosophist.
This sounds interesting. Can you be more precise? When you say American
Theosophist, do you mean this, rather than Quest? When you say recent,
which year?
Tony
But---------the reality of what SR and Mrs B wrote on
>numerical aspect is TOTALLY separate issue from typos & mistakes in Mrs
>B's text. Both can exist.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 17:42:55 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id PAA06097 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 15:55:15 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990204215408.22500.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [203.157.31.147]
From: "Andrew Basler"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Cloning=Budding
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 13:54:06 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Since the physical body resulting from cloning will be identical with
the original one, the Astral should come from the same source. The
process is similar to "Pudding Bags" of the First Root Race and our next
Race. If human cloning is successful ( I doubt it though at least four
cells embryo has been achieved, see
http://www.globalchange.com/clonekorea.htm) it is likely that normal
human Entity will take the available vehicle. The demand is always
great, thought the process looks more like possession or Pho-wa than
reincarnation.
Andrew
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 17:50:40 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id PAA05760 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 15:52:46 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 21:52:03 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be5088$9985a700$315e95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <199902041208.MAA02238@mailhost.dircon.co.uk>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Tony,
Those are two really good examples from the Secret Doctrine of what you are
getting at. The difference in spelling *is* interesting in the context that
you put it. It may be nothing. It may be something. The point is that
once the spelling of the words is standardised, the student has no
opportunity to reflect on, to question, the significance of the difference.
Thanks,
Peter
> Examples re: "mispellings" have been given before in relation to the
> original SD and the BdeZ SD. These two are given in an attempt to
> illustrate a point of view.
>
> In the "Occult Catechism" (pp. 11-12 Proem) MANVANTARA is spelt in 2
> different ways. These are standardised to the one spelling in
> the BdeZ SD.
> As it was put to me, are they spelled differently, because one is
> referring
> to the ROOT MANU, the other to the SEED MANU?
> It is an interesting observation and promotes lines of thought, which
> otherwise may have been glossed over.
> Some of us study the SD with the approach, why is it spelled differently?
> Others that one spelling must be wrong, and thus altering it, as has been
> done in the case of the BdeZ SD.
>
> Another e.g., which has been given before: Disk on page 1 (Proem) becomes
> disc on page 4. They are given the same spelling in the BdeZ SD.
> Disk on page 1 could relate to Kosmos
> On page 4 to cosmos, thus the symbols illustrated.
> The difference between Kosmos and cosmos is explained on page 3.
> Should we be making these alterations to what is clearly seen as
> mispellings
> in the BdeZ edition?
>
> When we make alterations, are we able to cover all the angles? Thus the
> remarks/question made to Richard, to which he has given
> interesting replies,
> about the numerological aspect. It seemed, that if we altered
> the spellings
> of the Sanskrit words, etc., it may also alter the numerical values,
> something we may very well be ignorant of. And for this reason the concern
> about altering them. As I understand it, he is saying by correcting the
> spellings (of the Sanskrit) it will be also correcting the numerological
> aspects as well.
>
> This mail is certainly not written for reasons of respect, as
> from previous
> experience it can bring the opposite.
>
> It is not written for you to agree with in any way, and can appreciate it
> has no place in your approach to Theosophy, and the the study of the
> Theosophical writings.
>
> It is just another point of view, and the more points of view
> there are the
> better, but once the writings themselves are altered, it becomes that
> persons viewpoint.
>
> Hopefully this makes things clearer?
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 22:46:09 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id VAA27068 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 21:22:27 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990205140017.007c7e90@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 14:00:17 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and being torn asunder by a NUCLEAR
reaction or How I learnt to love necessity.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Here's a theory:
After passing through all evolutionary forms, re-entering the source and
starting again (after a manvantara), would a monad start again the process
at the next evolution - and having attained the highest whatever the hell
it is we want to call it - get the chance to be an atom that is torn
asunder by a nuclear process, thus annihilating that monad - for the monad
that is at the centre of a nuclear explosion - it would literally be
obliteration. It's polarity destroyed. Does now the essence of that atom
only exist as an infinite wave vibration continuing through infinity.
I haven't said this very well, but hopefully you'll get the drift.
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 22:53:36 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id VAA26754 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 21:19:09 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990205135722.007c3aa0@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 13:57:22 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is
the SOUL = the MIND
In-Reply-To: <000301be4f7a$a6a099e0$9f0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
References: <3.0.2.32.19990203133213.008b3d70@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas:
>In this commentary from the BARDO it is not clear as to who is
>looking at what. At least that is the impression I get.
*** I think that is the point though. Who really is looking at what?
>Is there not a vast distinction between the inquiring
>CONSCIOUSNESS who looks at the EMBODIED CONSCIOUSNESS - our
>minds, memories and thoughts of today and yesterday - and say
>what are their value in terms of permanency ? In other words in
>me (my Mind), I can see that I can look at my memories and think
>my thoughts, but I am not bound either by those images of the
>past or the actions of the present. I am detached from both.
>They exist but I am not forced into any position by them. They
>are subordinate. I am the permanent "I".
So you are saying that the centre of each of us, the thought generator,
communicator, speech-maker, is identical in all ?
>Do we have two CONSCIOUSNESSES or do we have ONE CONSCIOUSNESS
>and two planes (at least) of perception?
It would seem that the universal consciousness has two planes - one of them
by defintion INSANE - ie our material existence - the illusion that the
many are in fact real.
>What is NIRVANA ? How can it be described, unless some
>CONSCIOUSNESS has been there, returned, and then left a
>description ? We must logically assume that the "I" when it
>enters that state, it severs its connection with the "embodied
>Self," and no longer has a basis for involvement in earth life
>activities. Why should a blank state be considered bliss? Could
>we stand it ? Are we saying that as MINDS we desire to cut of
>FEELING and EMOTION ? And, can this be truly done ?
You ask many questions here - i presume most rhetorically to force me down
a line of reasoning - but lets just hold up a moment and try to deal with
each question.
What is Nirvana? A Seattle Grunge Band fronted by murdered singer kUrt
Cobain? No seriously - I would say that is is the state of supreme freedom
from suffering that is the goal of all Buddhist practice. It is attainable
by all beings because it is the final truth of their condition. But here
to, the defintion depends on the school. My personal opinion is that it
must be a non-dual state.
Why should a blank state be considered bliss? and associated questions -
I sort of look at it as the withdrawel of the triangle back into the point.
Thus from the trinity of object, subject and process of observation - the
object and subject become one without process - this 'zero-point'
consciousness, availbale to us between every moment - is identical with the
primordial unmanifested state. But I don't want to comment upon it's state
in anything like human terms such as 'bliss'.
Are we saying that as MINDS we desire to cut off FEELING and EMOTION?
THis is the essence of Maya. The desire of the unity for relation begats
emantion and descent. So if we wish to end suffering we must end desire and
it's associates FEELING and EMOTION. You can't have one without the other.
Is this not the Buddha's path - and in fact the opposite of theosophy which
desires incarnation?
>I know that in Hindu and Buddhist thinking the ideal of a
>non-essing (deliverance from sin, feeling and sorrow) is
>considered superior to earthly life as we know it today. But is
>that not a reaction from the power that we all possess, to some
>degree, of "putting ourself in the place of another" and enjoying
>or suffering along with them - as we picture they must be
>enjoying or suffering (if they were using our nature) ?
You are saying that we can have our cake and eat it too. I think Karma is
more like a Zero-point equalizer. From nothing all came, and from nothing
it shall return. As long as the grand equation balances. While we desire we
force the equation out of equilibrium - karma only tries to return it
balance, on all planes.
>Is "freedom from hurt and suffering" the only thing to be
>achieved by personal progress ? If so, then do we know what
>causes suffering ? How do we stop from creating more suffering
>for ourselves ? [ I sound like a disciple repeating the Buddha's
>4 Paths ] because, the next is: what active steps should we take
>to control our lives and actions so as to make ourselves
>harmless - and thus bring on a state of karma-less-ness ? {the
>Hindus, Jains and Buddhists enjoy discussing such matters and are
>very active (those that are interested) in discussing such
>philosophical things.
Is there existence in karmalessness though? If all is cyclical then we must
assume that the seed for existence lies within the state - becuase we are
here now. If we really are here.
>Of what value to us is a state in which we assume it is blissful
>if nothing is done or contemplated or felt or contacted ?
These are human concerns.
>Has anyone acquired a greater quality of awareness, attention,
>concentration or meditation by entering (even for an hour) a
>condition of sense-deprivation ?
Have you read John C Lily's autobiography?
>I think there is relevance to DESCARTES' statement. Are we not
>essentially MIND-BEINGS ? Is the MIND a permanence, a dynamic
>investigator, an ever-changing repository of memories ? What is
>it ?
>Why are we burdened with it ? Why do we imagine that
>NOTHING-NESS is a solution to the pain and suffering of embodied
>life ? (Which is how NIRVANA is often described.)
adhyatmavidya has much to say on the illusive nature of mind, too much for
me to go into here - but suffice to say that the concept of a MIND only
exists in a MIND, if you get my drift.
And we imagine that NOTHINGNESS is a solution precisely because it is that
- a solution. It doesn't mean it's the only solution, but it still is a
solution to all suffering caused by RELATIONSHIP. Relationship implies
duality - the concept of the other.
>Next we could ask are we essentially FEELING-BEINGS ? do we
>enjoy the inter-action and inter-relation of our life ? Can we
>live without feeling, desire, goals, amusement, and, yes, pain ?
This is the Ego talking - it loves the security of this existence - it even
puts up with the pain because it is more afriad of what the unity
consciousness existence implies.
>I think the real problem is one of selecting our thoughts,
>objectives and actions that result from decision making. Can we
>act so as not to hurt ourselves by a future reaction that is
>painful ?
I would say no.
>Why does a criminal hide his actions and pretend to be virtuous?
>Does that not imply he is innately aware that he is doing wrong,
>and in order to continue to live in "society" without close
>supervision, he has to pretend to be trustworthy ? And, if he
>has that innate awareness and knows the difference between right
>and wrong, why persist in doing that which is hurtful to others,
>and ultimately to himself?
Fear. Fear is the path to the Darkside.
>Sorry, I have a lot of questions I have asked myself, and am
>trying to trace down useful answers. So far I have found the
>propositions of theosophy to be the most valuable.
As do I. But I'm having trouble reconciling theosophy if it doesn't accept
the Tibetan 'between' states model - as I have personally experienced this
model. I'm beginning to think that theosophy as a concept is fine, but that
Theosophy as espoused by the TS is a pointer to find for ourselves what the
victorian mind could not bring to light.
>You may be interested in "No-saying," but I find it more valuable
>to ask questions. Perhaps we can all learn from each other by
>going forward, not by applying brakes on our thinking - or am I
>wrong in understanding what you are driving at ?
I'm sort of following the Socratic 'questioning model'. Often I will say
stuff that I may not necessarily believe in, just to provoke lively debate
and discussion.
>I wonder if we are trying to approach the same thing, but perhaps
>from different perspectives ?
More than likely. I'm trying to find a theory that matches my experience.
I hope this gives you some more food for thought - and as I've said before
- my belief system is very fluid - so feel free to throw pebbles in the pond.
Regards
darren porter
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 4 22:58:07 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id VAA26791 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 21:19:31 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990205135736.007c4e70@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 13:57:36 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World Devachan and Tibetan Buddhism
In-Reply-To: <6ccd2f2.36b13276@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi all,
Can we please stop referring to the Bardo Thodrol as the Tibetan book of
the Dead - This is not it's name merely a Western interpretation - it's
actual translation would be closer to 'liberation through understanding in
the between'.
Here is what i determine to be the prime difference between Theosophy and
Buddhism - Our aim and the after-death state.
I can't reconcile Devachan with the Bardo states unless HPB meant that all
Bardo states were collectively called Devachan. Now, unlike Devachan, we
can access these Bardo States right now to prove for ourselves whether the
Bardo Thodrol's outline of the after death states is correct.
Consider this table:
Truth Body Beatific Body Emanation Body
Death Between Life
Sleep-state Dream-state Waking-state
Waking Trance Waking Magic Body Waking Gross Body
And then this :
The Six Betweens Experienced Between
life birth and death
dream sleep and waking
trance dualistic consciousness and enlightened awareness
death point life and reality
reality death point and existence
existence reality and birth
By conscious examination of these transitions and their realtion to three
bodies we can see for ourselves whether the Bardo Thodrols picture of death
and the ability to attain liberation is true. If it holds true, what then
for HPB's devachan? It sounds like a christian subjective heaven to me
personally - but the Bardo Thodrol would consider it just ONE portion of
the after death state - that of the 'hallucinatory theatre'.
Darren
At 11:00 PM 1/28/99 EST, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 1/24/99 5:54:55 PM, gschueler@netgsi.com writes:
>
>>But Dallas, HPB not only uses the term wrongly, but even if
>>you look at exactly how she defines it, there is no such an
>>after-death state anywhere mentioned in the Tibetan Book
>>of the Dead. This goes, I think, beyond lingusitics.
>
>How far beyond? What has the Tibetan Book of the Dead have to do with
>theosophy? What makes you so sure HPB wrote that definition? It could have
>been anyone (since, as we all know, she hadn't even finished 1/3 of the
>Glossary before she died.
>
>As far as "beyond linguistics" goes... It actually goes just far enough
>beyonder into the lowest realm of using it to nit pick theosophy that it
>should be totally ignored by serious students.
>>
>>The term Devachan (spelled bDe ba can) is given an
>>honorable mention in MYRIAD WORLDS where it is said
>>to be the Tibetan for Sukhavati "Blissful Realm." (p. 247).
>>It is not even considered important enough to describe,
>>but in fairness to HBP it is at least mentioned as a "place"
>>somewhere on the inner planes.
>
>Actually, comparing, in a theosophical context, the Tibetan word "bDe ba can"
>and the word "Devachan" as used by HPB to describe a specific after death
>state, is ridiculous... Since, these words would have two different, possibly
>unrelated connotations, and could have no relation to each other. Therefore,
>any discussion of it being relevant to HPB's teachings of the science,
>philosophy, and ethic of theosophy, is a pointless waste of time. Either
>HPB's teaching of the final after death state is right or wrong, but whatever
>word is used to identify it has no relevance. Consequently one must accept
>HPB's description, or not, and either study theosophy, or not, based on that
>decision. The truths of theosophy can only be intuited, and no objective
>words or concepts can describe its subjective realities. Labels, are just
>that--and can never represent a thing or idea as they are.
>
>>The question now becomes, Where did HPB get the idea
>>for her definition of Devachan as an after-death state for the
>>ego or jiva? This could only have come from the bardo of
>>Tibet if you tweak some more definitions. G de P does
>>try to do this, and his explanation is probably the best that
>>I have ever heard. However, and I think that this is important,
>>he carefully says that Devachan as used in Theosophy as
>>a state of mind and not a place per se. He points out that
>>the deceased in Devachan could be located anywhere at all.
>
>G de P is all wet if he said that... Since Devachan is neither a place nor a
>state of mind--but simply a state of higher "consciousness" far above the
>level of "mind." That's the problem with self-elected theosophical
"teachers"
>or critics, and other academic philologists and linguists who try to edit the
>Secret Doctrine, and in the course of doing so, show how they have
>misinterpreted its basic teachings--and thereby, mangle and distort it. HPB
>talked about the realm she labeled "Devachan" so many times in all her
>writings, that there cannot be any doubt about what state she meant, or what
>its nature and functions are.
>
>Incidentally, FYI, the word "jiva", used in context of the BOTD, refers to
the
>lower ego or personality, going through the astral on it's way to Kama Loka,
>not to the higher Ego afterward on its way to Devachan. Thus, the BOTD,
which
>is concerned, exoterically, only with these astral realms, has no
authority in
>confirming or denying the Devachanic or any other esoteric teachings of
>theosophy.
>
>>Clearly Blavatsky was not trying to use all of the Tibetan
>>ideas--she plainly refuted the idea of transmigration into
>>animals, which HH the Dali Lama still believes possible.
>>She also refuted the idea of 49 days and instead gives
>>the after death thousands of years--an idea that is a
>>possibility but not typical in Tibetan Buddhism. She also
>>eliminated the six realms of the Tibetan after death state.
>
>True, and rightly so. As a whole, theosophy has nothing to do with Tibetan
>"ideas" since it goes back long before Tibet even existed. Most Tibetan
ideas
>are nothing more that a mixture of Indian Buddhist and native shamanistic
>religious and magic teachings that had lost sight of their "root" theosophy
>long ago. All the TBOD is concerned with is the Astral realms and has no
>connection with the higher mental-spiritual realms such as Devachan (where
the
>"monad" finally ends up beyond the reach of the "elemental" kingdom).
>
>If the Tibetans speak of six realms of after death states (and if they know
>what they are talking about--should you not be talking about the adept
>"Tibetans" (really Indians) who taught HPB :-) then such realms would
>certainly include the final Devachan--which is actually in three states since
>it concerns the higher manas, buddhi,and atma spiritual realms or fields--the
>nature of which the BOTD doesn't talk about... While, the lower three are in
>the elemental or astral (lower manas-kama-prana fields or states) which the
>BOTD DOES talk about.
>
>But all that proves, is that whatever the Tibetans teach, beyond the basic
>Buddhist ethics, four noble truths, and eight fold path--has no relationship
>to theosophy as a "pure" "SYNTHESIS of science, philosophy and
religion"--(but
>not those of any particular discipline, cult or sect). And, naturally, the
>study of language, or the usage of words is not any part of that teaching.
>(And neither is the study of any part of Tibetan Buddhism or
Shamanism--except
>as weak and twisted reflections of theosophical science and
philosophy--which,
>incidentally, in its modern form, includes all the findings of Western
Science
>that no Tibetan teaching or any Eastern philosophy or religion comes even
>close to understanding. (Maybe Kipling (a Mason by the way) was right
when he
>said, "East is east and West is west, and never the twain shall meet.":-)
>
>Incidentally, for the real theosophists in this forum who may be interested;
>All fields are triune in nature since they have one pole fed by the negative
>material or physical energies and the other by the positive spiritual or
>consciousness energies... And, the "Tai-Chi" field "loop" that these energies
>take, is in the form of a 3-cycle closed spiral that, in its first harmonic,
>forms two mirrored (zero-point) energy foci in addition to the root-field
>focus.
>
>(for a symbolic visualization of this, study the diagram and description
at:
>HREF="http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield
.ht
>ml">http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.h
tml
> )
>
>As theosophy teaches, the entire Cosmos is but one Energy eternally
>spinning--close in to finite space and infinite mass when asleep and expanded
>wide into infinite space and finite mass when awake--in its three and seven
>robes, fields or aspects that are, forever, "in coadunition but not in
>consustantiality"... (And, obey all the laws of photo-electricity,
>relativity, quantum, and sub-quantum physics--as taught and presaged by
HPB in
>the SD--when manifest on our plane of material existence.)
>
>Understanding the nature and origin of these coadunite fields and their
>relationship to the three fundamentals, as well as the linkages between
>consciousness, mind and body, can serve as a definitive subjective "proof" of
>any theosophical doctrine or derivative application--as well as a means to
>directly approach "self realization".
>
>Once that triple "point" is seen, the inner teacher in all of us needs no
>further help, guidance nor proofs--through words or concepts (that can only
>represent, but never capture pure "ideas")--to confirm what it already
knew.
>
>So much for philology, and linguistics as useless tools in teaching or
>learning fundamental Theosophy--which is represented and taught in the Secret
>Doctrine (as) "The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy"--that
>doesn't depend, in any aspect, upon the language it's written in.
>
>LHM
>
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
>
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 02:44:32 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id CAA15468 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 02:00:09 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 02:58:48 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Astral
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/4/99 2:43:19 PM, Dorothy wrote:
<>
But why not?
It is important to note that the clone is not merely an extension of an
existing physical form. It is a fully-formed duplicate, a completely
developed additional form. Twins and triples (if identical) also have the
EXACT SAME genetic material. In effect, they are clones. Would anyone
propose that there is only one astral model? Or worse, that only one of the
bunch has a soul?
Gardeners frequently take a sprig or branch from a tree and graft it onto
another tree, which then bears new kinds of fruit, with new kinds of seeds,
and new kinds of offspring grow up. Hybrids. None of these have astral
forms?
HPB seems to indicate that the physical and the astral forms of all things in
nature exist on the *SAME PLANE*. In fact, somewhere HPB even indicates that
the physical is *NO PRINCIPLE* but merely a fleshy covering of the real first
principle, the astral. So I doubt __anything__ can exist physically without
some sort of electro-magnetic astral form holding it together, else the atoms
and other particles would scatter and the form would collapse.
If there are other ideas, particularly if they make reference to specific
Theosophical teachings, I would be very interested to hear.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 08:40:18 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id HAA05516 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 07:21:06 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the SOUL = the MIND
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 13:20:23 -0000
Message-ID: <000101be510a$49a31560$a65c95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990205135722.007c3aa0@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi Darren,
You wrote:
> I'm sort of following the Socratic 'questioning model'. Often I will say
> stuff that I may not necessarily believe in, just to provoke lively debate
> and discussion.
Yes, I like the Socratic model too. I've always had the feeling that it
works best when applied mainly to ourselves and sparingly to others. This
way we can develop and learn to articulate our own understanding, and
through sharing it with others we can contribute to the overall
understanding.
When I'm with people who *continually* use the Socratic model on others (and
you probably don't do this), I'm often left with the feeling that I am doing
all the work! 'They' throw out questions, other people do the work of
answering them, only to be met with another round of questions & so on. It
can be even more frustrating when one discovers the other person doesn't
even believe in the questions they are asking.
The dialogues of Socrates (with Meno and others) were written by Plato - a
good example of this questioning technique taking place *within* the person
and shared for the benefit of others.
Best wishes
Peter
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 08:47:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id HAA05520 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 07:21:07 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Astral
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 13:20:20 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be510a$4760c680$a65c95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi Rich (and others interested in 'cloning' and related theosophical
issues.)
> It is important to note that the clone is not merely an extension of an
> existing physical form. It is a fully-formed duplicate, a completely
> developed additional form. Twins and triples (if identical) also have the
> EXACT SAME genetic material. In effect, they are clones. Would anyone
> propose that there is only one astral model? Or worse, that
> only one of the bunch has a soul?
That's a good point Rich. As I understand it, in 'natural' childbirth the
child shares the genetic material of the parents, but of course it still has
it's own astral double. The process of birth from a cloned cell seems to be
identical to those births from 'test tube' and artificial insemination.
Once the fertilised cells are placed in the womb these in turn develop as in
childbirth from natural conception. So, once again, there is no reason why
the developing foetus should not have it's own astral form and other lower
principles, and reincarnating Ego.
What makes 'cloning' importantly different is the effort to duplicate the
DNA in the cell, prior to fertilisation, to make it identical to that of
another person's body. Genetic scientists assert that with genetic
engineering they will be able to accurately predict the growth of the body,
the kinds of illnesses incurred, the mental and physical attributes of the
child through out life and so on. Hence the ethical concerns about
scientists futher attempting to manipule DNA to produce 'perfect' race based
on our personal wants and desires.
Theosophy puts a different view, as we know. It states that the physical
and mental characteristics that we are born with are the result actions in
past lives, slightly influenced by the hereditory factors of race, and
guided by Karma. More importantly, the true individuality is the
Reincarnating Ego, which can make choices, develops new characteristics and
so on. So the idea that scientists can create someone who is indentical to
some one else and then predict their later development in life may simply be
misfounded, a science without a soul.
> HPB seems to indicate that the physical and the astral forms of
> all things in nature exist on the *SAME PLANE*.
Yes, she does, Rich, although she doesn't use the term "astral form" and
more than one "plane" appears to be involved.
"...the spiritual prototypes of all things exist in the immaterial world
before those things become materialised on Earth." SD vol 1 p 58
When one reflects on the various references to "prototype" in the SD there
are clearly many levels of them. For at one place HPB talks about those
exisiting in the Akaska, and in other places refers to those in the Astral
Light. There are protypes of Dhyan Chohans, Human Egos, and physical
forms. There are prototypes for human forms that are developed over large
period s (Rounds) that in turn are based on more 'etheral prototypes',
developed in earlier ronds. So one gets a sense of a stepping down process.
HPB again:
"..for the Lotus plant exists not only as a miniature embryo in its seed (a
physical characteristic), but its prototype is present in an ideal form in
the Astral Light from "Dawn" to "Night" during the Manvantaric period, like
everything else, as a matter of fact, in this objective Universe; from man
down to mite, from giant trees down to the tiniest blades of grass.'
SD vol 1 p63.
But does this mean there is a prototype present in ideal form for each and
every mite and blade of grass that existed? My own sense is that there is
a prototype for each 'kind' of form. Thus there is a prototype for the
human body in general, 'trees' in general & so on. But there is a great deal
of variety as a result of evolution and karma. For we also 'know' that
while the Linga Sharira is the astral prototype for our physical body during
incarnation, this is only temporary. The astral body is one of the first
principles to disintegrate after death. At the next incarnation a new one
is formed based on the general 'human prototype' and modified by Karmic
characteristics.
The above is offered more tentatively than might come across on the
'screen'.
There are a few more quotes below,
Best wishes,
Peter
HPB writes:
"Therefore our human forms have existed in the Eternity as astral or
ethereal prototypes; according to which models, the Spiritual Beings (or
Gods) whose duty it was to bring them into objective being and terrestrial
Life, evolved the protoplasmic forms of the future Egos from their own
essence. After which, when this human Upadhi, or basic mould was ready, the
natural terrestrial Forces began to work on those supersensuous moulds which
contained, besides their own, the elements of all the past vegetable and
future animal forms of this globe in them. Therefore, man's outward shell
passed through every vegetable and animal body before it assumed the human
shape." SD vol 1 p282
"Occultism teaches that no form can be given to anything, either by nature
or by man, whose ideal type does not already exist on the subjective plane.
More than this; that no such form or shape can possibly enter man's
consciousness, or evolve in his imagination, which does not exist in
prototype, at least as an approximation." SD vol 1 p282, footnote
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 09:46:11 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA14454 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 09:01:46 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 09:56:38 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Whats in a Name?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
<>
Its as good a name as any other. In fact, the Egyptian Book of the Dead
is a made-up name too. Its actual name known by the Egyptians is Coming
Into the Light, or Coming Forth by Day.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 09:53:31 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA15420 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 09:09:22 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 10:04:27 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Devachan
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>>I can't reconcile Devachan with the Bardo states unless HPB meant that
all Bardo states were collectively called Devachan. Now, unlike
Devachan, we can access these Bardo States right now to prove for
ourselves whether the Bardo Thodrol's outline of the after death states
is correct.>>
Darren, The Bardo is in between our living state on Earth and Devachan.
Devachan corresponds to the realms of titans and gods. Actually, we can
demonstrate the devachan right now too. I have done so, and G de
Purucker states that many "mindless" people (i.e., those who lack
attention to the present) are in Devachan while living (it is more a
mental state than a place according to the MLs). Old people tend to
daydream about past experiences a lot--this is Devachan and old age is a
preparation for it while living.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 10:01:06 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA14010 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 08:58:29 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 09:53:18 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Tibetan Book of the Dead vs Theosophy
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>> But I'm having trouble reconciling theosophy if it doesn't accept the
Tibetan 'between' states model - as I have personally experienced this
model. I'm beginning to think that theosophy as a concept is fine, but
that Theosophy as espoused by the TS is a pointer to find for ourselves
what the victorian mind could not bring to light.>>
Darren, It does reconcile the Tibetan bardo states, in a fashion. I too
have "personally experienced this model" and so I was pleased many years
ago to read G de Purucker's account of the after-death state according
to Theosophy. He says that we first enter a spiritual bliss-like
formless state (first bardo), and then enter the kama-loka (second
bardo), and then a gestation period to devachan (third bardo). The only
real difference is that the Tibetans offer six realms of possible
experience after kamaloka which includes devachanic experiences as well
as rebirth as a human or transmigration to an animal. If you look
beyond the obvious religious symbolism of the Tibetan Book of the Dead,
the two are not very different at all. Quest publishing has several book
out on this subject.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 10:13:20 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA10146 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 08:23:40 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the SOUL = the MIND
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 07:23:15 -0800
Message-ID: <000301be511b$794e6420$a20e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990205135722.007c3aa0@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 5th 1999
Dear friend:
Dallas offers some comments below:
----------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the
SOUL = the MIND
Dear Dallas:
You wrote:
>In this commentary from the BARDO it is not clear as to who is
>looking at what. At least that is the impression I get.
*** I think that is the point though. Who really is looking at
what?
>Is there not a vast distinction between the inquiring
>CONSCIOUSNESS who looks at the EMBODIED CONSCIOUSNESS - our
>minds, memories and thoughts of today and yesterday - and say
>what are their value in terms of permanency ? In other words in
>me (my Mind), I can see that I can look at my memories and think
>my thoughts, but I am not bound either by those images of the
>past or the actions of the present. I am detached from both.
>They exist but I am not forced into any position by them. They
>are subordinate. I am the permanent "I".
So you are saying that the centre of each of us, the thought
generator,
communicator, speech-maker, is identical in all ?
DALLAS: The Egoic Consciousness IS ONE AND UNCHANGED THROUGH
EACH STATE THAT WE PASS. It serves to maintain the string of
memory - or we would not be aware in retrospect of those states.
In regard to the continued CONSCIOUSNESS of the Ego from life to
life, since the brain is reconstructed afresh each incarnation
from the scattered "life-atoms" (Skandhas) of earlier lives
which are re-attracted to it as a Center, it forms the basis for
our sense of "I-ness" and our character, capacities and talents
or lack of these if they have not been developed earlier). This
is what I get out of the Theosophical teachings.
Dallas asked:
>Do we have two CONSCIOUSNESSES or do we have ONE CONSCIOUSNESS
>and two planes (at least) of perception?
It would seem that the universal consciousness has two planes -
one of them
by definition INSANE - i.e. our material existence - the illusion
that the
many are in fact real.
DALLAS I would not call it "insane" since the faculty of
memory and of Egoity are at the base of our consciousness.
Confused perhaps, at times, but usually prepared to consider new
ideas, and sustain its own interest in verifying them
Theosophically, as I see it:
Perception is the faculty of the Spirit - Atma
Wisdom as the memory of the effects of past choices (and their
results) is the faculty of Buddhi - the Spiritual Mind
Reasoning, ratiocination, logic, inquiring, planning are
faculties of the Mind/soul (Manas).
Desire, emotion, want, egoism and selfishness (or KAMA), (to me)
identify the Mind enveloped in the passional nature (Kama-Manas).
This is the Lower, the embodied mind presently as we are AWAKE,
it is resident and dominant in our waking minds just now.
When the waking mind is able to perceive "needs" as different
from, and often opposed to "wants" then the possibility of
perceiving the Kamic-principle ("Desires & Passions") as a
principle separate from the mind.
Thus we have:
1. Spirit - perception (it is unitized in us, but is also not
separate from the
ONE SPIRIT - which is EVERYTHING at its ROOT. When this
manifests as a unit, a form is needed, and Wisdom (Buddhi) is
that first "form."
2. Wisdom - memory of all experiences (universal vision and
memory of past events)
3. Mind - memory, imagination, anticipation, this is the area of
action and creativity. It can foresee potential results.
4. Desire and Passion - a faculty of selfishness and the desire
to acquire and to own. It is incapable when dissociated from
the Mind of foresight.
Dallas asked:
>What is NIRVANA ? How can it be described, unless some
>CONSCIOUSNESS has been there, returned, and then left a
>description ? We must logically assume that the "I" when it
>enters that state, it severs its connection with the "embodied
>Self," and no longer has a basis for involvement in earth life
>activities. Why should a blank state be considered bliss?
Could
>we stand it ? Are we saying that as MINDS we desire to cut of
>FEELING and EMOTION ? And, can this be truly done ?
You ask many questions here - I presume most rhetorically to
force me down
a line of reasoning - but lets just hold up a moment and try to
deal with
each question.
What is Nirvana? A Seattle Grunge Band fronted by murdered singer
kUrt
Cobain? No seriously - I would say that is the state of supreme
freedom
from suffering that is the goal of all Buddhist practice. It is
attainable
by all beings because it is the final truth of their condition.
But here
to, the definition depends on the school. My personal opinion is
that it
must be a non-dual state.
DALLAS: The series of question is only to open the mind to other
possibilities as one develops the next. No compulsion, only
sincere wonder on my part - following how I develop a line of
questions - for you to compare with your own line.
Why would we equate NIRVANA with bliss-and absence of "pain ?"
If it is non-dual (and I would agree to this, on a very long time
consideration, as to the time that can be spent in that state, it
is still limited in terms of ultimate time. I say this because
within the ALL or the ONE, it is a limitation. It is not THE
ALL.
Why should a blank state be considered bliss? and associated
questions -
I sort of look at it as the withdrawal of the triangle back into
the point.
Thus from the trinity of object, subject and process of
observation - the
object and subject become one without process - this 'zero-point'
consciousness, available to us between every moment - is
identical with the
primordial unmanifested state. But I don't want to comment upon
it's state
in anything like human terms such as 'bliss'.
DALLAS To me it would seem so, since dissociating ourselves as
"Perceivers" from any kind of "perception," and "pain" is such,
the state achieved would not be an ultimate, or TRUE
"zero-point."
To me the "primordial unmanifested state" is present as the base
for the Atmic Perception since it is the only thing that is
completely in contrast with temporary forms, states - all such
being aspects of MAYA-illusion. Only the UNCHANGED PERCEIVES
CHANGE. Hence I said that CONSCIOUSNESS does not vary according
to the states we experience, but records what happens there,
using BUDDHI as the base for such recording in its AKASIC sense
(or aspect).
Are we saying that as MINDS we desire to cut off FEELING and
EMOTION?
DALLAS Not to "cut off" but to recognize that thinking is
different from "feeling" or "passion" or "desire".
This is the essence of Maya. The desire of the unity for relation
begets
emanation and descent. So if we wish to end suffering we must end
desire and
it's associates FEELING and EMOTION. You can't have one without
the other.
Is this not the Buddha's path - and in fact the opposite of
theosophy which
desires incarnation?
DALLAS Not to "end it" but, to understand it, and be able to
prevent it as influence, from taking over the mind. Holding the
Mind and its perception power (derived from the One Spirit) from
being overwhelmed in a sense of selfish possessiveness or selfish
rejection of the pain of loss or the incapacity to change outer
circumstances for one's self or for others.
Dallas asked:
>I know that in Hindu and Buddhist thinking the ideal of a
>non-essing (deliverance from sin, feeling and sorrow) is
>considered superior to earthly life as we know it today. But is
>that not a reaction from the power that we all possess, to some
>degree, of "putting ourself in the place of another" and
enjoying
>or suffering along with them - as we picture they must be
>enjoying or suffering (if they were using our nature) ?
You are saying that we can have our cake and eat it too. I think
Karma is
more like a Zero-point equalizer. From nothing all came, and from
nothing
it shall return. As long as the grand equation balances. While we
desire we
force the equation out of equilibrium - karma only tries to
return it
balance, on all planes.
DALLAS In a way I think you are right. Since we are involved in
manifestation, the karma of our past, and the circumstances of
our present, and we face the consequences of our present choices,
we ought to ask ourselves "Why are we here ?" Is there some duty
(dharma) which we ought to be learning how to perform ?
Becoming universalized and personally detached from our emotional
bondage is probably the clearest method we can first adopt. But
on second thought, even that is selfish, because while it might
liberate us from "pain and suffering" by achieving a personal and
selfish NIRVANA - the so-anticipated bliss of non-involvement -
it does not take into account our duties and responsibilities due
to our family, friends, and our whole environment. And that is
still rather difficult to define. It spreads out around us and
to achieve true liberation from suffering, those beings, friends,
family ought to be liberated also. So we are in a way back to
square one, and if we have compassion we may decide to renounce a
personal Nirvana, and remain to assist and "show the way" to
others who seek it.
To me the concept of compassion and the need for cooperation and
co-existence would overwhelm any desire for a personal "rest" and
"bliss."
Dallas asked:
>Is "freedom from hurt and suffering" the only thing to be
>achieved by personal progress ? If so, then do we know what
>causes suffering ? How do we stop from creating more suffering
>for ourselves ? [ I sound like a disciple repeating the
Buddha's
>4 Paths ] because, the next is: what active steps should we take
>to control our lives and actions so as to make ourselves
>harmless - and thus bring on a state of karma-less-ness ? {the
>Hindus, Jains and Buddhists enjoy discussing such matters and
are
>very active (those that are interested) in discussing such
>philosophical things.
Is there existence in karmalessness though? If all is cyclical
then we must
assume that the seed for existence lies within the state -
because we are
here now. If we really are here.
DALLAS That is exactly my own thought. There has to be an answer
to this which is reliable. In answering this we firs have to
determine who and what we are. Our took is the mind. It is
driven by the "desire to known the truth." And finally our "will"
drives the process of learning and focuses our attention, so we
can concentrate and mediate on all relevant aspects of this
search.
Dallas asked:
>Of what value to us is a state in which we assume it is blissful
>if nothing is done or contemplated or felt or contacted ?
These are human concerns. DALLAS This implies mental action.
Dallas asked:
>Has anyone acquired a greater quality of awareness, attention,
>concentration or meditation by entering (even for an hour) a
>condition of sense-deprivation ?
Have you read John C Lily's autobiography? DALLAS Not yet.
Dallas said:
>I think there is relevance to DESCARTES' statement. Are we not
>essentially MIND-BEINGS ? Is the MIND a permanence, a dynamic
>investigator, an ever-changing repository of memories ? What is
>it ? Why are we burdened with it ? Why do we imagine that
>NOTHING-NESS is a solution to the pain and suffering of embodied
>life ? (Which is how NIRVANA is often described.)
adhyatmavidya has much to say on the illusive nature of mind, too
much for
me to go into here - but suffice to say that the concept of a
MIND only
exists in a MIND, if you get my drift.
DALLAS ADI primal or first
ATMA the ONE SPIRIT
VIDYA true knowledge or Wisdom
The meaning is contained in the compound word and is understood,
as above. Yes Mind is developed so that the Atma may enter into
contact with the rising evolution of individuality as form
(matter) becomes more sensitive and able to receive a reflection
of the MANAS-HIGHER-MIND.
The present mind we use as controller of the brain, while we are
conscious in the waking state, (I think all these specifications
are necessary) is only a reflection of the true the superior the
Spiritual Mind. The Spiritual Mind (Higher Manas) is always free
and detached from the lower, embodied Mind (Kama-Manas).
Theosophy looks on Atma - Buddhi - Manas as being the immortal
EGO, the THREE-IN-ONE or That which illuminates the Lower Mind,
resident in our personality when it is awake.
And we imagine that NOTHINGNESS is a solution precisely because
it is that
- a solution. It doesn't mean it's the only solution, but it
still is a
solution to all suffering caused by RELATIONSHIP. Relationship
implies
duality - the concept of the other.
DALLAS Agreed. But that does not do away with dharma - or
continued responsibility, as I try to say above.
Dallas said:
>Next we could ask are we essentially FEELING-BEINGS ? do we
>enjoy the inter-action and inter-relation of our life ? Can we
>live without feeling, desire, goals, amusement, and, yes, pain ?
This is the Ego talking - it loves the security of this
existence - it even
puts up with the pain because it is more afraid of what the unity
consciousness existence implies.
DALLAS I quite agree. But it is "afraid" of the implications of
"unity" with the One Consciousness, because, being inexperienced,
it has not understood the value of the Laws of nature and their
universality. Once that it grasps that aspect of the situation,
it becomes reconciled to its being improved through
universalization and adjustment to an un-selfish future. In
other words the isolation and selfishness of KAMA is transmuted
into KAMADEVA - the "all-embracing" desire (such as the Buddha or
the Jain Tirthankaras showed) for the benefit of all beings. And
for this reason such beings who arise from the merely human-mind
condition become the NIRMANAKAYAS - those who remain with the
world and humanity in order to assist all to improve by
self-effort. [ If you have a copy of HPB's THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY
see "Kamadeva" p. 170. ]
Dallas said:
>I think the real problem is one of selecting our thoughts,
>objectives and actions that result from decision making. Can we
>act so as not to hurt ourselves by a future reaction that is
>painful ?
I would say no. DALLAS If we understand ourselves well, we ought
to be able.
Dallas asked:
>Why does a criminal hide his actions and pretend to be virtuous?
>Does that not imply he is innately aware that he is doing wrong,
>and in order to continue to live in "society" without close
>supervision, he has to pretend to be trustworthy ? And, if he
>has that innate awareness and knows the difference between right
>and wrong, why persist in doing that which is hurtful to others,
>and ultimately to himself?
Fear. Fear is the path to the Dark-side.
DALLAS I agree but to overcome fear need knowledge and that
requires education and self-training in universal concepts of law
in living. Is not the "Dark-side" selfishness and isolation ?
"Me" against the rest of the world and everybody in it ?
Of what value is that in the long run? Does it eliminate pain
and sorrow or increase it ?
Dallas:
>Sorry, I have a lot of questions I have asked myself, and am
>trying to trace down useful answers. So far I have found the
>propositions of theosophy to be the most valuable.
As do I. But I'm having trouble reconciling theosophy if it
doesn't accept
the Tibetan 'between' states model - as I have personally
experienced this
model. I'm beginning to think that theosophy as a concept is
fine, but that
Theosophy as espoused by the T S is a pointer to find for
ourselves what the
Victorian mind could not bring to light.
DALLAS Theosophy as espoused by the T S is nebulous. Theosophy
as taught by HPB is definite (see KEY TO THEOSOPHY for instance)
HPB teaches of Devachan and the "in-between lives" states and
explains their reason for so being there. The teachings are
orderly and well reasoned. I am not sure that the "T S" as a
group is fully aware of those, as my contact through this
chat-group shows they as a generality are unfamiliar with that
which HPB taught.
Now, to characterize HPB's teaching as "Victorian" is belittling
it, perhaps unintentionally, and without understanding what she
tried to convey. Truth is not dated by Victoria, Elizabeth II,
or any era. It is timeless.
HPB's language is very clear to me, and it is only in the last
few years that I hear the belittling phrase launched at her work
as "Victorian."
Well suppose that it is "Victorian" - Does that make it less true
? Do we respect Shakespeare, or Tennyson, or Shopenhauer,
Goethe, Descartes, Paracelsus, Jesus, Buddha, Byron, Emerson,
Thoreau, Bronson Alcott or the Brownings or Coleridge, Addison,
Ruskin, Lincoln, etc., the less because of their era and age?
Or is the implication that since she taught (and all that we know
today of the universal doctrines and reasoning of Theosophy is
based on that), the English language has changed so much (in 110
years) that we do not understand her any more ? I sense that a
subtle barrier has been erected to distract students from going
to her and seeing what she actually said. Now I wonder why that
should be so ? Is it because Science has advanced and many of
the prophecies and hints she dropped have been fulfilled since
she wrote them? Or is it that her philosophy has been so far
unassailed in any serous manner? I really wonder why and where
this demeaning arose, and especially who have not studied her
works. Very curious. I've worked at and used them for over 50
years and find them refreshingly interesting as I survey them
when confronted with fresh questions.
Dallas wrote:
>You may be interested in "No-saying," but I find it more
valuable
>to ask questions. Perhaps we can all learn from each other by
>going forward, not by applying brakes on our thinking - or am I
>wrong in understanding what you are driving at ?
I'm sort of following the Socratic 'questioning model'. Often I
will say
stuff that I may not necessarily believe in, just to provoke
lively debate
and discussion.
DALLAS Quite so. And so we continue this quest.
Dallas wrote:
>I wonder if we are trying to approach the same thing, but
perhaps
>from different perspectives ?
More than likely. I'm trying to find a theory that matches my
experience.
I hope this gives you some more food for thought - and as I've
said before
- my belief system is very fluid - so feel free to throw pebbles
in the pond.
DALLAS I don't think you are unique in this, as all true students
maintain the kind of attitude you express so well.
Thanks and best wishes, Dallas Feb 5th 1999
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 14:20:14 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA21175 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:01:39 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <7345f8c9.36bb4d57@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:58:15 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Cloning=Budding
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/5/99 5:03:43 AM, Andrew wrote:
<>
Great reference to the budding process, and I agree with you both in the
astral scenario and in the Pho-wa possession scenario.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 14:26:44 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA21295 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:02:06 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <36a46d4c.36bb4d45@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:57:57 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Devachan and Tibetan Buddhism
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/5/99 6:38:47 AM, Darren wrote:
<>
The Master himself clears up your confusion on the Bardo and its relation to
Devachan on page 105 and following of Barker's Mahatma Letters (not the
chronological edition, I don't know what page it is there). Bardo is
specifically mentioned.
If anyone doesn't have the Mahatma Letters, please send an email to the list
and I'll quote the section I'm talking about.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 14:32:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id NAA20665 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 13:59:31 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <24af81ca.36bb4d52@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 14:58:10 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE: Theos-World "Koot Hoomi Unveiled"
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/5/99 1:15:44 AM, Tony wrote:
<<> In the "Occult Catechism" (pp. 11-12 Proem) MANVANTARA is spelt in 2
> different ways. These are standardised to the one spelling in
> the BdeZ SD.
> As it was put to me, are they spelled differently, because one is
> referring
> to the ROOT MANU, the other to the SEED MANU?>>
You could assume this, but I think it is a mistake to do so. The "v" and the
"w" are not two different letters in Sanskrit. Sanskrit *has* no letter w.
However, in parts of Bengal and other places, the letter v is given a w
pronunciation.
If Sanskrit wants to be more specific about what *kind* of manvantara, it adds
a prefix or a suffix to modify the root noun. A Root Manu would be
"Mulamanvantara" and a Seed Manu would be a "Shishtamanvantara." In the
absence of such spellings, I think you are reading in to the passage here in a
manner likely to produce even more confusion.
There *are* however two different kinds of Manvantaras described here. One,
in a footnote on page 11, is a MAHAmanvantara, but in the catechism they are
manvataras. Here HPB means to be specific, and she is.
In the case of disk and disc, I fail to see the importance of the distinction.
However, I will concede that in Kosmic and Cosmic I do see a significance.
One thing to keep in mind, however, is that HPB herself did not arrange the
sections of the SD, or type them up. Here Mr. Judge and a host of lesser
minds had a hand, and often their typing, arrangements and other "corrections"
are what cause the spelling and other errors in the first place. HPB states
she corrected some of them, but often the Masters (and presumably HPB) chose
to leave people to their own devices.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 18:24:49 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA18489 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 18:09:15 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Astral Laws of Reincarnation and of Karma
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 17:09:19 -0800
Message-ID: <000601be516d$52ddb820$980e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <000001be510a$4760c680$a65c95c1@et.u-net.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 5th 1999
On cloning and reincarnation.
Under what of the rules of reincarnation and karma would cloning
occur ?
What does Theosophy offer in the way of information concerning
such an event?
What starts rebirth, and why ?
What would the immortal Ego or the Divine Triad
[ATMA-BUDDHI-MANAS] have to do with physical attempts at
conception, gestation and cloning ?
What part would the "skandhas" play ?
How would the karma of the "life-atoms" that have to be assembled
around an "astral body" dove-tail with the incoming Ego ?
Can fecundation and gestation occur outside a living womb ?
In what way would the joining of the gametes of the parents
influence the growth of the physical clone ?
Are the components, physical, astral, pranic and kamic of the
clones identical in all respects ? Or, is this something that is
assumed ? If atoms are individual, then that so-called
"identity" is fictitious.
These questions enter my mind, and perhaps someone has some
pointers other than speculations to offer ?
Dallas
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 18:39:18 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA18954 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 18:13:43 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and being torn asunder by a NUCLEAR reaction or How I learnt to love necessity.
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 17:13:38 -0800
Message-ID: <000801be516d$ee99e220$980e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990205140017.007c7e90@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 5th 1999
Dallas would like to comment on the "theory" below:
Dear friends:
This is offered as a result of thinking over Darren's questions
for a couple of days.
D. Porter
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 8:00 PM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and being torn asunder
by a NUCLEAR reaction or How I learnt to love necessity.
Here's a theory:
After passing through all evolutionary forms,
DALLAS: It far more than passing through "forms." How about the
emotional and the mental progress, and the moral one ? Those too
have to be satisfied for a successful conclusion to the School of
our total Earth experience. Don't they ?
re-entering the source and starting again (after a manvantara),
DALLAS: Theosophy states that the MONAD does not loose its
identity as a result of passing through the extensive time of
"sleep" called a PRALAYA (opposite of a manvantara). HPB
states this in a number of places.
It re-merges into the conditions of a fresh Manvantara which is
the karmic result of the previous one. And in effect, takes up
its "pilgrimage" at the point where it went to sleep. Apparently
the processes of sleeping and passing through the Pralaya period
of "rest" are very similar.
would a monad start again the process at the next evolution -
DALLAS Under the just law of KARMA how could it do anything else.
It is not manipulated except by itself and the choices it makes.
and having attained the highest whatever the hell it is we want
to call it - get the chance to be an atom that is torn asunder by
a nuclear process, thus annihilating that monad - for the monad
that is at the centre of a nuclear explosion - it would literally
be obliteration. It's polarity destroyed. Does now the essence of
that atom
only exist as an infinite wave vibration continuing through
infinity.
DALLAS This is quite speculative and entirely based on concepts
that stem from our present condition of matter and the
perceptions we derive from living in it.
Why presume that the rest of Nature (or the Universe) is exactly
the same as the kind of matter we are living in ? Do we
thoroughly know all we can about our kind of matter?
What causes the aggregation of atoms to form molecules and cells
? What are the individual differences of atoms, molecules,
cells, caused by ? How does a human acquire a body and then
sustain it though life ?
How does human desire and thought impinge on the structure that
underlies the arrangement of atoms ? [ Ex.: bio-feed-back ]
Why assume a nuclear explosion, and even so, why expect that the
"essence" of an atom, would be totally destroyed. No doubt, the
present form, or the kind of form it may be living in then, may
be altered, or dispersed. [ Is the ATOM a physical something
-- so far all experiments in nuclear physics that I have read
about (I see weekly reports on all scientific fronts) show that
it is assumed to be composed of a series of forces arranged in
definite patters with vibratory rates and inter-actions all their
own and quite distinctive, each from the other. ] But are the
components or the patterns destroyed, or assumed to be destroyed
? What law of nature would demand such an arbitrary fate ? Are
we (as forms) destroyed when we go to sleep, or does the physical
body enter an automatic-control condition where the life
sustaining monitors guide and control the animating organs while
the conscious person is on another plane of perception - say,
dreams ?
If we are still quite uncertain about the immortality of the Ego,
and the process of reincarnation, and if we have yet to perceive
the necessity for ethical and moral considerations as a basis for
universal ecology and the protection of all beings, then how can
we take only one aspect of a potential condition and speculate on
it ?
I realize these are a series of questions designed to draw
attention to the far wider range of cause and effect that
surrounds any change, however vast, or supposedly "final."
Why do we suppose that Nature as a whole is lawless, chaotic and
is to be dominated by us, humans who still are children in the
matter of knowing what and how the whole of our surroundings
operate ?
Should we not start and catalog what we do know? And what are
the laws that Theosophy puts forward for us to consider ?
Some of these seem to me to be:
Universality of cause and effect. Human brotherhood and the
solidarity and cooperative existence of all the components of
nature, Karma. Reincarnation of the immortal Ego. Potential
"perfection" (or all-knowingness) for the Human thinker. The
balance of freedom of choice and inherent responsibilities.
These to me represent some of the fundamental concepts to be
understood and mastered.
Do these not probe into the causes of our being and the reason
for things being the
"way they are ?"
Best wishes,
Dallas
=================================
I haven't said this very well, but hopefully you'll get the
drift.
*************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 20:24:56 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA28456 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:44:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theos Talk"
Subject: Theos-World Reincarnarion == Some more aphorisms on Devachan (II)
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 18:41:59 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be517a$4b2309c0$420e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 5th 1999
Some more quotations from Theosophical sources on Devachan are
offered:
List II.
How is Devachan Created ?
"...we ourselves create our Devachan...while yet on earth, and
mostly during the latter days and even moments of our
intellectual sentient lives. That feeling which is strongest in
us at that supreme hour, when as in a dream, the events of a long
life to their minutest detail are marshaled in the greatest order
in a few seconds in our vision, (Fn.:--That vision takes place
when a person is already proclaimed dead. The brain is the last
organ that dies.) that feeling will become the fashioner of our
bliss or woe, the life-principle of our future existence...The
real full remembrance of our lives will come but at the end of
the minor cycle,--not before..." Theos. Articles & Notes, p. 246
Who Goes to Devachan
"The personal Ego, of course, but beatified, purified, holy.
Every Ego--the combination of the 6th and 7th principles--which
after the period of unconscious gestation is reborn into the
Devachan, is of necessity as innocent as a new born babe. The
fact of his being reborn at all shows the preponderance of good
over evil in his old personality...he brings along with him but
the Karma of his good deeds, words, and thoughts into this
Devachan...all those who have not slipped down into the mire of
unredeemable sin and bestiality go to the Devachan...Meanwhile
they are rewarded; receive the effects of the causes produced by
them." Theos. Art. & Notes, p. 244-5
Reason for Devachanic Experience
"The 'dream of Devachan' lasts until Karma is satisfied in that
direction. In Devachan there is a gradual exhaustion of
force..."The stay in D- is proportionate to the unexhausted
psychic [ spiritual and of the nature of the soul ] impulses
originating in earth life. Those whose attractions were
preponderatingly material will be sooner brought back into
rebirth by the force of Tanha...In such a case the average rule
has no application, since the whole effect either way is due to a
balancing of forces and is the outcome of action and reaction."
T. A. & N.p.249
What is Conscious in Devachan ?
"As to the personal Soul--by which we mean the spark of
consciousness that preserves in the Spiritual Ego the idea of the
personal "I" of the last incarnation--this lasts, as a separate
distinct recollection, only throughout the Devachanic period;
after which time it is added to the innumerable incarnations of
the Ego...(108) Immortality is but one's unbroken consciousness;
and the personal consciousness can hardly last longer than the
personality itself...and such consciousness...survives only
throughout Devachan, after which it is reabsorbed, first, in the
individual, and then in the universal consciousness." Key 107-8
["Manas...the Ego"] ..."It has not forgotten them [deeds in past
lives] ...it knows and remembers its misdeeds as well as you
remember what you have done yesterday." Key 136
Death Vision - A Review
"That particular one moment which will be most intense and
uppermost in the thoughts of the dying brain at the moment of
dissolution, will regulate all subsequent moments. The moment
thus selected becomes the key-note of the whole harmony, around
which cluster in endless variety all the aspirations and desires
which in connection with that moment had ever crossed the
dreamer's brain during his lifetime, without being realized on
earth,--the theme modeling itself on, and taking shape from, that
group of desires which was most intense during life." Theos. Art.
& Notes., p. 242
Basis for Devachanic "Dream"
[The force of unfinished mental work]... "an intense and purely
spiritual passion for intellectual pursuit," is called "an
unsatisfied yearning which must exhaust itself before the entity
can move on to the purely a-rupa (formless-impersonal) condition.
A provision is made for every case, and, in each case it is
created by the dying man's last, uppermost desire..." [not
"thought"] Theos. Art. & Notes, p. 32
"Life in Devachan is the function of the aspirations of earth
life; not the indefinite prolongation of that "single instant,"
but its infinite developments, the various incidents and events
based upon and outflowing from that one "single moment" or
moments." Key 162
Review of the Last Life Lived
"At the solemn moment of death every man, even when death is
sudden, sees the whole of his past life marshaled before him, in
its minutest details. For one short instant the personal becomes
one with the individual and the all-knowing Ego. But that
instant is enough to show him the whole chain of causes which
have been at work during his life. He sees and now understands
himself as he is, unadorned by flattery or self-deception. He
reads his life, remaining as a spectator looking down into the
arena he is quitting; he feels and knows the justice of all the
suffering that has overtaken him." Key 162
"Life in Devachan is the function of the aspirations of earth
life; not the indefinite prolongation of that "single instant,"
but its infinite developments, the various incidents and events
based upon and outflowing from that one "single moment" or
moments." Key 162
"The last series of powerful and deeply imprinted thoughts are
those which give color and trend to the whole life in devachan.
The last moment will color each subsequent moment. On those the
soul and mind fix themselves and weave of them a whole set of
events and experiences. expanding them to their highest limit,
carrying out all that was not possible in life."
Ocean, p. 113
"Occult Science teaches that the frame of mind in which a man
dies, is of the utmost importance owing to the abnormal and
psychic state in which he then is. The last thought of a dying
person does much to influence his immediate future. The arrow is
ready to fly from the bow; the bow-string is abreast of the ear,
and the aim will decide the immediate fate of the arrow. Happy
is he for whom "Om" is the bow, the Self is the arrow and
Brahman--its aim!" At such a sacred moment, strong spiritual
aspirations, whether natural or induced by the earnest
exhortations of either one who has a true conviction, or better
still, of one possessed of the divine Gnosis, will protect the
Soul of him who is leaving life...at death we shall be judged by
our own Higher Self, and, under the conduct of the agents of the
Karmic Law (the Demiurgos collectively), will have to reincarnate
again into the prison of the Body, until the past evil Karma has
been exhausted. For until the last farthing of the Karmic debt
is exhausted, we can never be untied from the wheel of "Sansara."
-Footnote by HPB-- Lucifer, Vol. 8, p. 127-8
"That flash of memory which is traditionally supposed to show a
drowning man every long-forgotten scene of his mortal life--as
the landscape is revealed to the traveler by intermittent flashes
of lightning--is simply the sudden glimpse which the struggling
soul gets into the silent galleries where his history is depicted
in imperishable colors."
Isis I 179
"When the frame is cold and eyes closed, all the forces of the
body and mind rush through the brain, and by a series of pictures
the whole life just ended is imprinted indelibly on the inner man
not only in a general outline but down to the smallest detail of
even the most intimate and fleeting impression." Ocean, p. 97
"That feeling which is strongest in us at that supreme hour, when
as in a dream, the events of a long life to their minutest detail
are marshaled in the greatest order in a few seconds in our
vision, (Fn.:--That vision takes place when a person is already
proclaimed dead. The brain is the last organ that dies.) that
feeling will become the fashioner of our bliss or woe, the
life-principle of our future existence...The real full
remembrance of our lives will come but at the end of the minor
cycle,--not before..." T A & N, p. 246
"That particular one moment which will be most intense and
uppermost in the thoughts of the dying brain at the moment of
dissolution, will regulate all subsequent moments. The moment
thus selected becomes the key-note of the whole harmony, around
which cluster in endless variety all the aspirations and desires
which in connection with that moment had ever crossed the
dreamer's brain during his lifetime, without being realized on
earth,--the theme modeling itself on, and taking shape from, that
group of desires which was most intense during life."
THEOS. ART. & NOTES., p. 242
Do Not Disturb the Dying
"No man dies insane or unconscious--as some physiologists assert.
Even a madman, or one in a fit of delirium tremens will have his
instant of perfect lucidity at the moment of death, though unable
to say so to those present...speak in whispers...lest you disturb
the quiet ripple of thought, and hinder the busy work of the Past
casting on its reflections upon the veil of the future." M L 170
Two Fields of Effects:
"There are two fields of causal manifestation; the objective and
the subjective. The grosser energies find their outcome in the
new personality of each birth in the cycle of evoluting
individuality. The moral and spiritual activities find their
sphere of effects in Devachan.
The dream of Devachan lasts until Karma is satisfied in that
direction, until the ripple of force reaches the edge of its
cyclic basin and the being moves into the next area of causes."
THEOS. ART. & NOTES, p. 242
Devachan -- A State of Selfishness
"...it is a state...of intense selfishness, during which an Ego
reaps the reward if his unselfishness on earth. He is completely
engrossed in the bliss of all his personal earthly affections,
preferences, and thoughts, and gathers in the fruit of his
meritorious actions. No pain, no grief, not even the shadow of a
sorrow comes to darken the bright horizon of his unalloyed
happiness: for it is a state of perpetual "Maya." Since the
conscious perception of one's personality on Earth is but an
evanescent dream, that sense will be equally that of a dream in
the Devachan--only a hundred-fold intensified...the happy Ego is
unable to see through the veil the evils, sorrows, and woes to
which those it loved on earth may be subjected...It has them near
itself, as happy, as blissful, and as innocent as the disembodied
dreamer himself..."
THEOS. ART. & NOTES, p. 245
Contact with Devachanees
"It is...during such a condition [ of blissful Maya ] that the
souls of astral Egos of pure loving sensitives, laboring under
the same delusion, [ of perpetual bliss ] think that their loved
ones come down to them on earth while it is their own spirits
that are raised towards those in the Devachan." THEOS. ART. &
NOTES, p. 245
"...the new Ego, once that it is reborn (in Devachan),
retains... --proportionate to its earth life-- a complete
recollection "of his life on earth;" but it can never visit the
earth from Devachan except in reincarnation." THEOS. ART. &
NOTES, p. 244
"Two sympathetic souls will each work out their devachanic
sensations, making the other a sharer in its subjective bliss,
Yet each is dissociated from the other as regards mutual
intercourse; for what companionship could there be between
subjective entities which are not even as material as that
Ethereal body--the Mayavi Rupa ?"
T. A. & N., p. 243
Adept Using Spiritual Nature has Access to Devachanic State
"...the disembodied entity being identical in nature with the
higher triad of the living man, when obliterated as a result of
self-evolution effected by the full development of conscious and
trained will, the adept can through this triad learn all that
concerns the Devachanee; live for the time being his mental
life, feel as he feels, and sharing thoroughly in his
super-sensuous perceptions, bring back with him on earth the
memory of the same, unwarped by mayavic deceptions..."
T A & N, p. 18
"There are two fields of causal manifestation; the objective and
the subjective. The grosser energies find their outcome in the
new personality of each birth in the cycle of evoluting
individuality. The moral and spiritual activities find their
sphere of effects in Devachan.
"The dream of Devachan lasts until Karma is satisfied in that
direction, until the ripple of force reaches the edge of its
cyclic basin and the being moves into the next area of causes."
THEOS. ART. & NOTES, p. 242
Devachan a Varied State
"As many varieties of bliss on Earth there are of perception and
of capability to appreciate such reward. It is an ideal
paradise; in each case of the Ego's own making, and by him
filled with the scenery, crowded with the incidents, and thronged
with the people he would expect to find in such a sphere of
compensative bliss. And it is that variety which guides the
temporary personal Ego into the current which will lead him to be
reborn in a lower or higher condition in the next world of
causes. Everything is so harmoniously arranged in
nature--especially in the subjective world-- that no mistake can
be ever committed by the Tathagatos who guide the impulses.
Devachan is a "spiritual condition" only as contrasted with our
own grossly material condition...[follows examples of various
instinctive and moral effects on the next incarnation] The
savage in being reborn would simply take a low place in the
scale, by reason of his imperfect moral development; while the
Karma of the other [wanton killer of animals] would be tainted
with moral delinquency..."
THEOS. ART. & NOTES, p. 245-6
Length of Devachanic Stay
[The stay in the Devachanic state] ...depends on the degree of
spirituality and the merit or demerit of the last incarnation.
The average time is from 10 to 15 centuries..."
THEOS. ART & NOTES 248 KEY 145
"...the term between two rebirths is said to extend from ten to
15 centuries, during which time the physical consciousness is
totally and absolutely inactive, having no organs to act
through..." KEY 132
"Here the average time means "the time for the average person..."
which depends on the subtle action of mind solely...and for most
of us impossible to lay down exact figures." T A & N p. 148
========================================
These quotations are offered in the hope that they will answer
some of the questions that have been discussed in the past weeks.
If there are additional quotations that can be added to this
list, or questions, please do contribute them.
Thank you,
Dallas
============================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 5 21:24:42 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA00544 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 5 Feb 1999 20:34:23 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <36BBA97E.6F7A93C7@eden.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 20:31:27 -0600
From: M K Ramadoss
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Theosophy and Action
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Some time ago there was a discussion about Theosophy and the active
actions taken by the Founders and other leaders. While many of us find
the philosophy presented in modern theosophy very fascinating to study,
we need to keep our focus on why TS was started and what is the key
objective of the Founders. It is to help the suffering Humanity. One of
the ways to help the suffering Humanity is to eliminate the causes which
cause suffering. One such thing is war. Here is a post from listening-l
which might interest some.
mkr
========================================
Most people are used to look to a philosophy which is based a scripture
or any other document to guide one in life's day to day affairs. Most
are passive in that we read and listen and rarely do something about
what we read or listen.
A key aspect of K's teachings is the emphasis K places in the need to
act; and act Now. He has repeatedly stated that if more and more of us
act based on the conviction that something like war is not good, then we
can change the world. This is what has attracted me to K's writings and
lectures. Indeed when I have had occasion to see something that is going
on or that is going to happen is not right or good for our fellow
beings, I have acted; acted quickly and have seen results, even though I
may be the only person to perceive the fact and need for action
resulting from such perception.
So if more of us do something about things we see as not good for the
world, soon there will be change, even though only a handful are
involved.
My 0.02
mkr
==================================
Rob Johnston wrote:
> Questioner: Is it one of the duties of teachers to show childrenthat
> war in any of its forms is inherently wrong? K: What would happen to a
> teacher who really taught the wholesignificance and stupidity of war?
> He would soon be without ajob. So, knowing that, he begins to
> compromise. (Laughter)You all laugh, you say it is perfectly true,
> but you are the verypeople who are maintaining the whole system of
> thought. If youreally, humanly felt the ugliness and cruelty of war,
> you asindividuals would not contribute to all the steps leading up
> tonationalism and eventually to war. After all, war is merely the
> resultof a system based on exploitation, on acquisitiveness. We
> hopeby some miracle that this system will change. We do not want
> toact individually, voluntarily, freely, but we are waiting for a
> systemto be created by others in which individually we will have
> noresponsibility. If this happens, we shall merely become slaves
> toanother system. If a teacher really feels that he must not teach
> war, because heunderstands the full significance of it, then he will
> act. A man whodeeply and intelligently feels the cruelty of a thing
> in itself will actand not consider what will happen to him.
> (Applause) (source: Krishnamurti in Latin America (1936)
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sat Feb 6 18:08:56 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA10445 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sat, 6 Feb 1999 16:47:15 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: Theos-World RE: Theosophy and Action == Why brotherhood ?
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 15:47:02 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be522b$005081a0$450e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <36BBA97E.6F7A93C7@eden.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 6th 1999
Dear Doss:
Excellent posting. Very helpful.
May I add.
As I see it, "Brotherhood" is EXPLAINED in Theosophy.
It is not merely sentiment, OR "COMPASSION," but Theosophical
doctrines give the reason for it. No religious doctrines that I
am aware of explains why "brotherhood" is so important. I find
the following can be extracted from HPB's presentation made in
THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY and THE SECRET DOCTRINE.
Let me take a brief moment to show what I perceive that Theosophy
teaches:
1. Every thing and every being of whatever kind of consciousness
or intelligence or material come from the ONE UNIVERSAL SOURCE OF
LIFE AND BEING. When (under Karma) the Universe of forms is
emanated as a manifestation from the ABSOLUTENESS
(Parabrahmam),it reassumes the condition of the many UNITS which
had previously made up that Universe in its earlier
"manifestation." Each finds itself in the same situation which
it was when it went "to sleep" during PRALAYA. Then a long
period is spent in assembling the necessary forces, and materials
to bring all these Units (MONADS) to the present condition that
we all know. [ It is similar to the gestation period for an
embryo, which is eventually born as a baby, and then it spends
more time learning until it achieves adult-hood.]
2. Every one of those UNITS is as immortal as all the rest in its
essence. It cannot be destroyed or annihilated, even when the
"forms" of matter it uses are dispersed. These UNITS (Monads)
consist in manifestation of SPIRIT and MATTER or "Maha-Atma" and
"Maha-Buddhi-Mulaprakriti" and with each of these is associated
INTELLIGENCE (Manas derived from MAHAT - Universal Mind).
3. The basic "life-Atoms" ( or MONADS ) consist of this
indestructible and ever progressing living substance. It is not
physical matter, such as we see all around us today, but a more
subtle matter consisting of FORCE and ENERGY which is directed by
a universal MIND - a Purpose - which we generally call Law or
Karma.
4. Each unit develops in time an intelligence that becomes more
conscious of itself and finally in the human form it develops
SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS (Ahankara). It has desires and wants and
needs (Kama), and in association with the Manas (Mind) it has
the faculty of choice - a freedom that enables it to direct its
future.
5. This individualization does not destroy the universal bond
that exists between any one Monad and all the rest. In fact it
reinforces the concept of cooperation and continuous
interaction. No form could survive unless others which are at
some 'lower' stage of evolution lent their energy and
intelligence to its living.
6. for this reason we are "brothers" to all "life-atoms" and to
all of humanity.
7. This wen understood should give us the power to control any
excess feeling of separateness and of a desire to dominate and
control others. Such a selfish and isolated attitude can only
work for a time. Then it must cease.
8. Nature (Karma) being disturbed by our selfish attitude is
delayed in its general evolution. Adverse Karma is generated as
other "life-atoms" are diverted from their natural advance.
When under Karma they return to us, they bring with them the
adverse impression we gave them earlier - by our selfish and
vicious wishes and choices. We then are faced with sorrow, pain
and difficult circumstances. These are educative and not
punitive.
9. This is Nature's way of showing us "the error of our ways."
We are given an opportunity to seek and find out the 'causes' of
the problems we endure.
10. In this way we can consciously elect to change our desires,
goals, and live a more compassionate and sympathetic life -
realizing we are all ONE at the base.
Do tell me if you find this is useful, or question any of the
observations made.
Best wishes,
Dallas
=====================================
M K Ramadoss
Sent: Friday, February 05, 1999 6:31 PM
Subject: Theos-World Theosophy and Action
Some time ago there was a discussion about Theosophy and the
active
actions taken by the Founders and other leaders. While many of us
find
the philosophy presented in modern theosophy very fascinating to
study,
we need to keep our focus on why TS was started and what is the
key
objective of the Founders. It is to help the suffering Humanity.
One of
the ways to help the suffering Humanity is to eliminate the
causes which
cause suffering. One such thing is war. Here is a post from
listening-l
which might interest some.
mkr
S N I P
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 7 04:55:49 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id EAA23882 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 04:10:57 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: LeonMaurer@aol.com
Message-ID: <982790a1.36bd6655@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 05:09:25 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and being torn asunder by a NUCLEAR reaction or How I learnt to love necessity.
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 54
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/5/99 8:56:32 AM, dport@ozemail.com.au writes:
>Here's a theory:
>
>After passing through all evolutionary forms, re-entering the source and
>starting again (after a manvantara), would a monad start again the process
>at the next evolution - and having attained the highest whatever the hell
>it is we want to call it - get the chance to be an atom that is torn
>asunder by a nuclear process, thus annihilating that monad - for the monad
>that is at the centre of a nuclear explosion - it would literally be
>obliteration. It's polarity destroyed. Does now the essence of that atom
>only exist as an infinite wave vibration continuing through infinity.
Here's another theory...
But, first, is it correct to speak of an "atom" as "having attained the
highest whatever the hell it is we want to call it"? I thought only a
sentient-human monad could "attain" or achieve anything--"by self devised and
self determined efforts"--after the lighting up of its manas. Doesn't
theosophy teach that all a monad can do after passing through all evolutionary
forms in one manvantara is continue on to higher forms in the next--in further
fulfillment of its karma? If so, then how can it start all over as a simple
"atom"? (Also, are we correct in speaking of an "atom" having a "monad"? Or,
is the word "monad," in theosophical parlance, relegated only to the higher,
godlike nature of humanity?)
Therefore, If a monad (atma, buddhi, manas), as theosophy posits, is composed
of the higher energies of the consciousness (spiritual-Perusha) field or
"plane", and the body (or atom?) which it inhabits is on the lower energy
physical (material-Prakriti) plane, why would a "nuclear explosion"--which
involves energies only within the matter-energy field (regardless of whether
or not it was attached to an "atom" at the source of the explosion) "destroy
its polarity and obliterate the monad"? Even an atom at the heart of an
atomic explosion disintegrates only into various smaller energy particles and
radiant energies that remain undiminished in their total energetics (while
still staying within the physical plane).
Therefore, in such an explosion, why wouldn't only the physical atom
(presuming it had a "monad") or the material body it was part of, be
destroyed--leaving intact the monad, (and, possibly, even the intermediate
lower energy, astral, prana, kama fields, in the case of a "human" monad)?
In the latter case, If the monad, could not be obliterated, then why couldn't
it remain intact as spiritual field vibrational patterns still connected with
its astral body field?
Is this what HPB meant when she discussed the problem of sudden accidental
(caused through random action of others, machinery failure, carpet bombing, A-
bombing, etc.) death of the body that leaves the monad stranded in a "Limbo"
state of suspended animation on the astral plane due to its unresolved karma?
Could this be where the concept and experience of "ghosts" come from? Or, the
idea of "possession"? Is this what HPB also meant when she discussed the
possibility, and the serious problems for the monad, of such "undeserved
karma"? Is such "entrapment" in the astral body state a possibility? If so,
how can the monad escape and pick up its karma again? (Or, does it have to
wait until the end of the manvantara while it walks around clanking its
chains, so to speak? :-)
Can someone give us the references in the SD or other theosophical writings
that speak of these conditions, problems and solutions?
LHM
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 7 15:21:41 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA04658 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 14:57:51 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and being torn asunder by a NUCLEAR reaction or How I learnt to love necessity.
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 13:57:46 -0800
Message-ID: <001401be52e4$e6b51200$b70e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <982790a1.36bd6655@aol.com>
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 7th
Dallas offers some references on "Abnormal Death and Karma"
Per request in
================================
-----Original Message-----
LeonMaurer@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 1999 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Emptiness, Evolution and etc...
In a message dated 2/5/99 8:56:32 AM, dport@ozemail.com.au
writes:
>Here's a theory:
>
>After passing through all evolutionary forms, re-entering the
source and
>starting again (after a manvantara), would a monad start again
the process
>at the next evolution -
SNIP
Here's another theory...
But, first, is it correct to speak of an "atom" as "having
attained the
highest whatever the hell it is we want to call it"? I thought
only a
sentient-human monad could "attain" or achieve anything--"by self
devised and
self determined efforts"--after the lighting up of its manas.
Doesn't
theosophy teach that all a monad can do after passing through all
evolutionary
forms in one manvantara is continue on to higher forms in the
next--in further
fulfillment of its karma? If so, then how can it start all over
as a simple
"atom"? (Also, are we correct in speaking of an "atom" having a
"monad"? Or,
is the word "monad," in theosophical parlance, relegated only to
the higher,
godlike nature of humanity?)
DALLAS As I understand it, MONADS (Atma-Buddhi-Manas) are
immortal centers of unitary Force and Perception. They are
directly derived from the ABSOLUTENESS. In Manifestation
(Manvantara) they and the primordial matter which is associated
with them, forms at first that which is called in the S D the
"MONADIC ESSENCE.
All material forms starting with the smallest (not only the
physical atom, but its components and primordial predecessors)
begin a pilgrimage which leads them into all the phases of
"material" experience - so that they will pass through and
experience those conditions. Eventually, having developed the
necessary faculties of perception in those conditions they reach
man's condition and the MIND faculty is the next one to be
developed. We are at the beginning of that stage.
Our Minds, though free and independent and able to choose, are
still closely allied with the animal-like faulty of KAMA, or
desire and passion. From this alliance arises most of our
troubles - those we call "bad karma." By following "desires and
passions" with a reckless short-sighted concern for any
consequences, we act selfishly and deform the smooth currents of
natural Karmic evolution. The deformation caused reacts on us
and tries to make us see how we erred and how we can repair the
damage.
Accidents, and restrictions that come without apparent cause may
be the result of actions chosen in this life or may be
"carry-overs" of unsettled accounts from an earlier life. The
immortal MONAD is supposed to be able to train the developing
LOWER MANAS - or that Mental Faculty that results from the
control and guidance of the Kamic faculties into a cooperative
stance in accord with nature and all its surroundings. In other
words, a brotherliness that does not impose or infringe on
other's rights and privileges.
Therefore, If a monad (atma, buddhi, manas), as theosophy posits,
is composed
of the higher energies of the consciousness (spiritual-Perusha)
field or
"plane", and the body (or atom?) which it inhabits is on the
lower energy
physical (material-Prakriti) plane, why would a "nuclear
explosion"--which
involves energies only within the matter-energy field (regardless
of whether
or not it was attached to an "atom" at the source of the
explosion) "destroy
its polarity and obliterate the monad"? Even an atom at the
heart of an
atomic explosion disintegrates only into various smaller energy
particles and
radiant energies that remain undiminished in their total
energetics (while
still staying within the physical plane).
Therefore, in such an explosion, why wouldn't only the physical
atom
(presuming it had a "monad") or the material body it was part of,
be
destroyed--leaving intact the monad, (and, possibly, even the
intermediate
lower energy, astral, prana, kama fields, in the case of a
"human" monad)?
In the latter case, If the monad, could not be obliterated, then
why couldn't
it remain intact as spiritual field vibrational patterns still
connected with
its astral body field?
DALLAS This sounds logical enough if we consider the physical
field manifestation as a starting point. One may assume that the
astral, pranic, kamic and manasic and superior "planes and
principles" are unaffected by what happens to the physical
vestures. Their progress is interrupted and delayed but the
Universal karmic law takes care to adjust that in due course.
Is this what HPB meant when she discussed the problem of sudden
accidental
(caused through random action of others, machinery failure,
carpet bombing, A-
bombing, etc.) death of the body that leaves the monad stranded
in a "Limbo"
state of suspended animation on the astral plane due to its
unresolved karma?
Could this be where the concept and experience of "ghosts" come
from? Or, the
idea of "possession"? Is this what HPB also meant when she
discussed the
possibility, and the serious problems for the monad, of such
"undeserved
karma"? Is such "entrapment" in the astral body state a
possibility? If so,
how can the monad escape and pick up its karma again? (Or, does
it have to
wait until the end of the manvantara while it walks around
clanking its
chains, so to speak? :-)
Can someone give us the references in the SD or other
theosophical writings
that speak of these conditions, problems and solutions?
DALLAS I will try to give some here sorry this has to be done
by sending a separate posting, which I do separately.
Dallas
Hope this is of help. I found the references explain a lot when
read consecutively.
================================
LHM
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 7 15:29:29 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA04635 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 14:57:40 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theos Talk"
Subject: Theos-World Accidental Death and Devachan
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 13:56:54 -0800
Message-ID: <001101be52e4$cd1b6ba0$b70e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Importance: Normal
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 7th 1999
Some quotes on Devachan and Accidental Death, etc.
>From Theosophical sources.
Reincarnation
"The spiritual Ego of man moves in Eternity like a pendulum
between the hours of life and death. But if these hours marking
the periods of terrestrial and spiritual life are limited in
their duration, and if the very number of such stages in Eternity
between sleep and awakening, illusion and reality, has its
beginning and its end, on the other hand the spiritual "Pilgrim"
is eternal.
"Therefore are the hours of his post-mortem life--when,
disembodied he stands face to face with truth and not the mirages
of his transitory earthly existences during the period of that
pilgrimage which we call "the cycle of rebirths"--the only
reality in our conception..." HPB Art. II 203
"Every Spiritual Individuality has a gigantic evolutionary
journey to perform, a tremendous gyratory progress to accomplish
...from first to last of the man-bearing planets, as on each of
them, the monad has to pass through seven successive races of
man...Each of the 7 races send 7 ramifying branchlets from the
Parent Branch: and through each of these in turn man has to
evolute before he passes on to the next higher race; and that
seven times...The branchlets typify varying specimens of
humanity--physically and spiritually--and no one of us can miss
one single rung of the ladder...There are other and innumerable
manvantaric chains of globes bearing intelligent beings--both in
and out of our solar system--the crowns or apexes of evolutionary
being in their respective chains, some--physically and
intellectually--lower, others immeasurably higher than the man of
our chain." M L p. 119
Nature of Consciousness--Monad--Man's Evolutionary Rounds
"...Man (physically) is a compound of all the kingdoms, and
spiritually--his individuality is no worse for being shut up
within the casing of an ant than it is for being inside a king.
It is not the outward or physical shape that dishonors and
pollutes the five principles--but the mental perversity. Then it
is but at his fourth round when arrived at the full possession of
his Kama-energy and is completely matured, that man becomes fully
responsible, as at the sixth he may become a Buddha and at the
seventh before the Pralaya--a "Dhyan Chohan."...He starts
downward as a simply spiritual entity--an unconscious seventh
principle (a Parabrahm in contradistinction to
Para-parabrahm)--with the germs of the other six principles lying
latent and dormant in him...(76) [ follows a description of
stages of differentiation, round by round, a kind of 'gestation'
process ]...Volition and consciousness are at the same time
self-determining and determined by causes, and the volitions of
man, his intelligence and consciousness will awake but when his
(77) fourth principle Kama is matured and completed by its
(seriatim) contact with the Kamas or energizing forces of all the
forms man has passed through in his previous three rounds. The
present mankind is at its fourth round (...as a genus...)...so
the individual entities in them are unconsciously to themselves
performing their local earthly sevenfold cycles--hence the vast
difference in the degrees of their intelligence, energy and so
on. Now every individuality will be followed on its ascending
arc by the Law of retribution--Karma and death accordingly. The
perfect man or the entity which reaches full perfection, (each of
his seven principles being matured) will not be reborn here. His
local terrestrial cycle is completed .(The incomplete entities
have to be reborn or reincarnated)...On their fifth round after a
partial Nirvana when the zenith of the grand cycle is reached,
they will be held responsible henceforth in their descents from
sphere to sphere, as they will have to appear on this earth as a
still more perfect and intellectual race. This downward course
has not begun but will soon...The above is the rule. The Buddhas
and Avatars form the exception as verily we have yet some Avatars
left to us on earth." M L p. 75-77
Bardo - Inter-birth State - Rupa-Loka - Rebirth
"Bardo" is the period between death and rebirth--and may last
from a few years to a kalpa. It is divided into three
sub-periods (1) when the Ego delivered of its mortal coil enters
into Kama-Loka (the abode of Elementaries); (2) when it enters
into its "gestation State" [Devachan]; (3) when it is reborn in
the Rupa-Loka of Deva-Chan. Sub-period (1) may last from a few
minutes to a number of years...sub-period (2) is "very long;"...
yet proportionate to the Ego's spiritual stamina; sub-period (3)
lasts in proportion to the good Karma, (106) after which the
monad is again reincarnated...an Ego is borne thither then begins
fading out and finally "dies," i.e., falls into that unconscious
condition which precedes rebirth; and... they leave the world of
bliss to be reborn in a world of causes." M L p. 105-6
Dispersal of Consciousness after Death -- Absorption of Lower
Principles into Higher Ones after Death
"The world of effects are not lokas or localities. They are the
shadow of the world of causes their souls--worlds having like men
their seven principles which develop and grow simultaneously with
the body. Thus the body of man is wedded to and remains for ever
within the body of his planet; his individual jivatma life
principle that which is called in physiology (72) animal spirits
returns after death to its source--Fohat; his linga shariram
will be drawn into Akasa; his kamarupa will recommingle with the
Universal Sakti--the Will-Force, or universal energy; his
'animal soul' borrowed from the breath of Universal Mind will
return to the Dhyan Chohans; his sixth principle--whether drawn
into or ejected from the matrix of the Great Passive Principle
must remain in its own sphere--either as part of the crude
material or as an individualized entity to be reborn in a higher
world of causes. The seventh will carry it from the Devachan and
follow the new Ego to its place of re-birth..." M.L. p. 71-2
"...there are great varieties in the Deva-Chan states...As many
varieties of bliss, as on earth there are shades of perception
and of capability to appreciate such reward. It is an ideated
paradise, in each case of the Ego's own making, and by him filled
with the scenery, crowded with the incidents, and thronged with
the people he would expect to find in such a sphere of
comprehensive bliss. And it is that variety which guides the
temporary personal Ego into the current which will lead him to be
reborn in a lower or higher condition in the next world of
causes. Everything is so harmoniously adjusted in
nature--especially in the subjective world, that no mistake can
be ever committed by the Tathagatas--or Dhyan Chohans--who guide
the impulses." M L p. 102
Time in Kama-Loka -- Elementaries -- Danger of Mediumship
"...The rule is, that a person who dies a natural death, will
remain from "a few hours to several short years," within the
earth's attraction, i.e., in the Kama-Loka. But exceptions are,
in the case of suicides and those who die a violent death in
general. Hence, one of such Egos, for instance, who was destined
to live--say 80 or 90 years, but who either killed himself or was
killed by some accident, let us suppose at the age of 20--would
have to pass in the Kama-Loka not "a few years," but in his case
60 or 70 years, as an Elementary, or rather an "earth-walker;"
since he is not, unfortunately for him, even a "shell." Happy,
thrice happy, (113) are those disembodied entities, who sleep
their long slumber and live in dream in the bosom of Space ! And
woe to those whose Trishna [desire to live] will attract them to
mediums, and woe to the latter, who tempt them with such an easy
Upadana [vehicle]...[more details on this]...And now, you may
understand why we oppose so strongly Spiritualism and
mediumship...(114)...Could the Spiritualists be only made to
understand the difference between individuality and personality,
between individual and personal immortality and some other
truths, they would be more easily persuaded that Occultists may
be fully convinced of the monad's immortality, and yet deny that
of the soul--the vehicle of the personal Ego; that they can
firmly believe in, and themselves practice spiritual
communications and intercourse with the disembodied Egos of the
Rupa-Loka, and yet laugh at the insane idea of "shaking hands"
with a "Spirit" !; that finally, that as the matter stands, it
is the Occultists and the Theosophists who are the true
Spiritualists, while the modern sect of that name is composed
simply of materialistic phenomenalists."
M L p. 112-4
Kama-Loka Consciousness -- Proportionate to Merit
"The good and pure sleep a quiet blissful sleep, full of happy
visions of earth-life and have no consciousness of being already
for ever beyond that life. Those who were neither good nor bad,
will sleep a dreamless, still a quiet sleep; while the wicked
will in proportion to their grossness suffer the pangs of a
nightmare lasting years: their thoughts become living things,
their wicked passions--real substance, and they receive back on
their heads all the misery they have heaped upon others. Reality
and fact if described would yield a far more terrible Inferno
than even Dante had imagined." M L p.123
Adept Immortality (Across the Arupa-Lokas)
"Suffice for you, for the present to know, that a man, an Ego
like yours or mine, may be immortal from one to the other Round.
Let us say I begin my immortality at the present fourth Round,
i.e., having become a full adept (which unhappily I am not) I
arrest the hand of Death at will, and when finally obligated to
submit to it, my knowledge of the secrets of nature puts me in a
position to retain my consciousness and distinct perception of
Self as an object of my own reflective consciousness and
cognition; and thus avoiding all such dismemberments of
principles, that as a rule take place after the physical death of
average humanity, I remain as - - -in my Ego throughout the whole
series of births and lives across the seven worlds and
Arupa-lokas until finally I land again on this earth among the
fifth race of men of the full fifth Round beings. I would have
been in such case--"immortal" for an inconceivable (to you) long
period, embracing many milliards of years. And yet am "I" truly
immortal for all that ? Unless I make the same efforts as I do
now, to secure for myself another furlough from Nature's
Law, - - - will vanish and may become a Mr. Smith or an innocent
Babu, when his leave expires. There are men who become such
mighty beings, there are men among us who may become immortal
during the remainder of the Rounds, and then take their appointed
place among the highest Chohans, the Planetary conscious
ego-Spirits." Of course the Monad "never perishes whatever
happens..." M L p. 129-130
Conscious State of Victims of Accident -- Dreamless Sleep
[ Explanation of state of consciousness of violent or accidental
death victims. See also last page of this series]
"...In cases of good and innocent Egos...the latter gravitates
irresistibly towards the 6th [buddhi] and 7th [atma ], and
thus--either slumbers surrounded by happy dreams, or, sleeps a
dreamless profound sleep until the hour strikes...The victim
whether good or bad is irresponsible for his death, even if his
death were due to some action in a previous life or an antecedent
birth; was an act...of the Law of Retribution, still, it was not
the direct result of an act deliberately committed by the
personal ego of that life during which he happened to be killed.
Had he been allowed to live longer he may have atoned for his
antecedent sins still more effectually: and even now, the Ego
having been made to pay off the debt of his maker (the previous
Ego) is free from the blows of retributive justice. The Dhyan
Chohans who have no hand in the guidance of the living human Ego,
protect the helpless victim when it is violently thrust out of
its element into a new one, before it is matured and made fit and
ready for it. We tell you what we know, for we are made to learn
it through personal experience... Yes; the victims whether good
or bad, sleep, to awake but at the hour of the last Judgment,
which is that hour of the supreme struggle between the 6th and
the 7th, and the 5th and 4th at the threshold of the gestation
state. And even after that, when the 6th and 7th carrying off a
portion of the 5th have gone into their Akasic Samadhi
[devachan ], even then it may happen that the spiritual spoil
from the 5th will prove too weak to be reborn (132) in Deva-Chan;
in which case it will there and then reclothe itself in a new
body, the subjective "Being" created from the Karma of the victim
(or no victim, as the case may be) and enter upon a new
earth-existence whether upon this or any other planet [read
"Globe"]." M L p. 131-2
"What you were taught is the Rule. [Bear always in mind that
there are exceptions...] Good and pure "accidents" sleep in the
Akasa, ignorant of their change; very wicked and impure--suffer
all the tortures of a horrible nightmare. The majority--neither
very good nor very bad, the victims of accident or violence
(including murder)--some sleep, others become Nature pisachas,
and while a small minority may fall victims to mediums and derive
a new set of skandhas from the medium who attracts them. Small
as their number may be, their fate is to be the most deplored." M
L p. 132
Food for Devachanic Reflection -- Last Thoughts
"Very true that "moment" lasts from the first to the last; but
then it lasts but as the key-note of the whole harmony, a
definite tone of appreciable pitch, around which cluster and
develop in progressive variations desires, hopes, dreams, which,
in connection with that particular "moment" had ever crossed the
dreamer's brain during his life-time, without having ever found
their realization on earth, and which he now finds fully realized
in all their vividness in devachan, without ever suspecting that
all the blissful reality is but the progeny begotten by his own
fancy, the effects of the mental causes produced by himself.
"That particular one moment which will be most intense and
uppermost in the thought of his dying brain at the time of
dissolution will of course regulate all the other "moments;"
still the latter--minor and less vivid though they be--will be
there also, having their appointed plan in the phantasmagorical
marshaling of past dreams, and must give variety to the whole.
No man on earth, but has some decided predilection if not a
domineering passion; no person, however humble and poor--and
often because of all that--but indulges in dreams and desires
unsatisfied though these be. Is this monotony? Would you call
such variations ad infinitum on the one theme, and that theme
modeling itself, on, and taking color and its definite shape
from, that group of desires which was the most intense during
life "a blank destitution of all knowledge...?" M L 192
"...Yes, certainly there is "a change of occupation," a continual
change in Devachan, just as much--and far more--as there is in
the life of any man or woman who happens to follow [in] his or
her whole life one sole occupation whatever it may be; with that
difference, that to the Devachanee his special occupation is
always pleasant an fills his entire life with rapture. Change
then there must be, for that dream-life is but the fruition, the
harvest-time of those psychic seed-germs dropped from the tree of
physical existence in our moments of dreams and hopes,
fancy-glimpses of bliss and happiness stifled in an ungrateful
social soil, blooming in the rosy dawn of Devachan, and ripening
under its ever fructifying sky. No failures there, no
disappointments! If man had but one single moment of ideal
happiness and experience during his life--as you think--even
then, if Devachan exists,--it could not be as you erroneously
suppose, the indefinite prolongation of that "single moment," but
the infinite developments, the various incidents and events,
based upon, and outflowing from, that one "single moment" or
moments, as the case may be; all in short that would suggest
itself to the "dreamer's" fancy. That one note, as I said,
struck from the lyre of life, would form but the Key-note of the
being's subjective state, and work out into numberless harmonic
tones and semi-tones of psychic phantasmagoria. There--all
unrealized hopes, aspirations, dreams, become fully realized, and
the dreams of the objective become the realities of the
subjective existence. And there behind the curtains of Maya its
vapors and deceptive appearances are perceived by the adept, who
has learnt the great secret how to penetrate thus deeply into the
Arcana of being." M L 197
Devachan
"...Devachan is a state where the Ego enjoys and does not suffer,
suffering being reserved for the earth life. It is not a
question of memory strictly speaking, but is a state where the
causes generated on this earth which can exhaust in no other
state, do so exhaust themselves, leaving the causes relating to
this plane of earth life to be afterwards exhausted here, and as
it is, like this life, a state of illusion, the Ego naturally
enlarges all its conceptions of what it thought best and highest
when it was alive, for such are the causes that relate to that
state." WQJ--Pract. Occ. p. 258-9
"As physical existence has its cumulative intensity from infancy
to prime, and its diminishing energy thenceforward to dotage and
death, so the dream-life of devachan is lived
correspondentially... As in actual earth-life, so there is for
the Ego in devachan--the first flutter of psychic life, the
attainment of prime, the gradual exhaustion of force passing into
semi-unconsciousness, gradual oblivion and lethargy, total
oblivion and--not death but birth: birth into another
personality, and the resumption of action which daily begets new
congeries of causes, that must be worked out in another term of
Devachan, and still another physical rebirth as a new
personality..." M L p. 195
"...the sensations, perceptions and ideation of a devachanee in
Rupa-Loka, will of course, be of a less subjective nature than
they would be in Arupa-Loka, in both of which the devachanic
experiences will vary in their presentation to the
subject-entity, not only as regards form, color, and substance,
but also in their formative potentialities. But not even the
most exalted experience of a monad in the highest devachanic
state in Arupa-Loka (the last of the seven states)--is comparable
to that perfectly subjective condition of pure spirituality from
which the monad emerged to "descend into matter," and to which at
the completion of the grand cycle it must return...The "reward
provided by nature for men who are benevolent in a large,
systematic way" and who have not focused their affections upon an
individual or specialty, is that--if pure--they pass the quicker
for that through the Kama and Rupa Lokas into the higher sphere
of Tribhuvana, since it is one where the formulation of abstract
ideas and the consideration of general principles fill the
thought of its occupants." M L p. 199-200
Kama-Loka - Suicides - Accidental Deaths
The Adept states: "We tell you what we know, for we are made to
learn it through personal experience." ML p. 131
1. Suicides:--
Though not separated completely from Buddhi and Atma yet there is
a vast gulf until the day when they would have normally died.
These two: Atma-Buddhi are passive for the intervening time, (to
the hour of the last judgment--when the last and final struggle
between Atma-Buddhi on one hand and Kama-Manas on the other
occurs).
(Theos. Articles & Notes, p.239-40)
Suicide is death brought on voluntarily and with full and
deliberate knowledge of its immediate consequences. (240)
If, in a fit on insanity a man commits suicide, he falls asleep
like any other victim of accident. TA&N 240
2. Accidental Deaths:--
The victim, good or bad, is irresponsible for his death.
Even if the death by accident were due to past Karma, it is not
the direct result of a personal act of the Ego in this life.
The Dhyan-Chohans protect the hapless accident victim when it is
violently thrust out of its life before it has matured and
been made ready for the new place in a normal way. (239)
In the case of accidental death, the 2 groups of principles
(Atma-Buddhi-Manas) and (Astral-Prana-Kama-Lower Manas) attract
each other. (239-240)
1. In the case of good and innocent egos the lower 4 gravitate
irresistibly towards Atma-Buddhi, and thus sleep,
1. a dreamless slumber, or
2. are surrounded by happy dreams until the hour when death
would have normally taken place occurs and the separation between
the "higher" and the "lower" principles occurs just before
Devachan ("gestation state").
If at that time Atma-Buddhi carrying the essence of Higher
Manasic experience proves to have too little for the operation
of the process of "Akasic Samadhi" in Devachan the Manasic
principle will reclothe itself in a new body (the direct
result of the remaining Karma of the victim) and enter upon a
new life on earth. [ Quick reincarnation ? ] TA&N (240)
3. Seance Room "Spirits":--
The only "visitors" at seance rooms as astral forms are:
1. suicides, and
2. Elementaries -- Kama-lokic remains & "Black
3. Magicians"
4. Executed criminals.
No pure Spirits visit any seance room. TA&N (240-1)
4. Victims of Vicious Indulgence:-- ( life shortening )
The cause of vice receives punishment. Motive is everything, and
man is punished in a case of direct responsibility only.
Vicious indulgence can cause an earlier death than provided
for under the personal karma of that life. TA&N (240)
5. Murderers - Executed Persons:--
Under the influence of the last violent thoughts and feelings he
felt before execution, the executed person will be ever reviewing
on the Astral Plane his anger and fear, and will be receiving the
impact of the changes made in the lives of others Influenced by
his acts. (240-1)
Those who are vicious, and not insane, are only partly killed on
execution. From the Astral Plane they will be affecting all
those who are sensitive enough to "feel and receive" them.
Especially at spiritualistic seances. There they project scenes
of blood and punishment into such weak persons, influencing them
to copy. [ They may also "haunt" astrally by attraction the place
of their crime or of execution.] (241)
At scenes of collective murder, where victims are overwhelmed by
a group and killed, the struggle and emotional impact may be
reenacted several times a year for many years. [ Ex.: Marathon ]
Those sensitive to the Astral images will see this. TA&N (241)
6. Insanity:--
Suicide and murder can be committed while insane. The period
between death of the body and the real death would be passed in
sleep. (Theos. Articles & Notes, p. 240 241)
====================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 7 17:53:38 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA22152 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 17:53:12 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/
Message-ID: <36BE278C.FAE86402@azstarnet.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Feb 1999 16:53:49 -0700
From: Caldwell/Graye
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com, Daniel Caldwell
Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky Online Reading Room
References: <000101be517a$4b2309c0$420e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
To: Students of Madame Blavatsky's Writings
Interested Inquirers
Please checkout on the WWW my "Blavatsky Online Reading Room" at
http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/
Daniel Caldwell
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 7 18:08:30 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA22393 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 7 Feb 1999 17:55:10 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990208103330.00886540@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 10:33:30 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is
the SOUL = the MIND
In-Reply-To: <000301be511b$794e6420$a20e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
References: <3.0.2.32.19990205135722.007c3aa0@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas:
Thankyou for taking the time to respond to my questions at such length. You
have given me much food for thought...and so I will mentally masticate on
this for a few days before asking what may seem even more inane questions.
Namaste
Darren
At 07:23 AM 2/5/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Feb 5th 1999
>
>Dear friend:
>
>Dallas offers some comments below:
>
>----------------------------------------------
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 7:57 PM
>Subject: RE: A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the
>SOUL = the MIND
>
>
>
>Dear Dallas:
>
>
>You wrote:
>
>>In this commentary from the BARDO it is not clear as to who is
>>looking at what. At least that is the impression I get.
>
>*** I think that is the point though. Who really is looking at
>what?
>
>>Is there not a vast distinction between the inquiring
>>CONSCIOUSNESS who looks at the EMBODIED CONSCIOUSNESS - our
>>minds, memories and thoughts of today and yesterday - and say
>>what are their value in terms of permanency ? In other words in
>>me (my Mind), I can see that I can look at my memories and think
>>my thoughts, but I am not bound either by those images of the
>>past or the actions of the present. I am detached from both.
>>They exist but I am not forced into any position by them. They
>>are subordinate. I am the permanent "I".
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 05:53:25 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id FAA25078 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 05:39:11 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the SOUL = the MIND
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 04:39:02 -0800
Message-ID: <000901be5360$018f7fe0$9f0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990208103330.00886540@ozemail.com.au>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 9th
Dear Darren:
Your questions and statements made me so quite some "mastication"
also, and that I enjoyed. There are so many valuable bits of
information and help contained in the theosophical literature. I
have always found it great entertainment to read and discover.
Also, when I re-read things, visiting them again after some
years, I find that my memory has faded - then, I am glad for the
revival.
Don't hesitate to come again anytime. It is good fun.
"Masticate" -- reminds me of an old joke: the little Boston boy
out for a stroll with his Nanny looked at a passing train and
said to her: "Look at the masticate, masticate."
Dal
============================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 10:23:25 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA11308 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 10:08:25 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 11:03:03 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
[Dallas]:<>
Surely you have heard that Christianity teaches us
that God is Love. Surely you are aware that Jesus
taught that we should all love one another, etc.
As far as I know, ALL of the world's religions stress
brotherhood. Its even in the 10 commandments.
I was taught that God is love, and that we are made
in His image and likeness, and that therefore brotherhood
is an inherent human quality, close to godliness,
back when I was a child.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 14:01:11 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id NAA04889 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 13:53:04 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: Theos-World RE: Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 12:52:44 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be53a4$fc40ce00$9a0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 8th 1999
This is how I see the situation:
If Theosophy is the modern expression of the truths that the
world has studied (regardless of and Religious or Philosophical
names} for aeons - so as to establish them as proven and
demonstrable LAWS and FACTS, then we can say that all the
religions, philosophies and sciences of our world, are
expressions in one way or another of the antique Theosophy.
[Theos = Divine; Sophos = Wisdom - a term that has been traced
in Greek back over 500 BC to Pythagoras ]
If we think that "theosophy" (the modern expression) is the only
presentation of the finding or "revelation" concerning Laws and
facts in Nature, then we would be making a serious error, as all
named religions and scientific philosophies are correct in making
similar claims for those facts and laws they have defined. These
claims when traced to their roots and origins show the same,
identical parentage.
This parentage starts with the ante-deluvian and mythical races
known as the "Lemurians," and the "Atlanteans." Their wisdom was
passed on to the Hindu, Chinese and Tibetan (Central Asian)
Sages. From them are derived Philosophical and Scientific
records, copies of these define to orientalists the source of
the division between pre-history and History. It is possible to
review the Westward spread of those precepts through Persia and
the middle East with the Zoroastrians, the Egyptians, the
Chaldeans, Assyrians, Babylonians and the Jews. In the Americas,
the same basic stream of wisdom is to be traced in Peru, Central
and South America, the Mayas, Quiches, Aztecs, Iroquois, Hopi,
Zunis, etc... in their myths and traditions show the same
concepts of "creation," and "evolution." In North Europe the
Norse, Druids and Celts had beliefs similar to those of the
"ancient sages." In South Europe, the influence of India and
Egypt can be traced on the Jews, Greeks, Etruscans and Romans,
from the Mystery Schools.
Around the 6th Century BC four great reformers worked as
contemporaries: Gautama Buddha, Lao-Tze, Manco Capac and
Pythagoras. Christianity commenced as a reform of Judaism. The
mystical traditions of the Pythagoreans, Nazarenes, Essenes,
Gnostics, Therapeutae, etc... were all drawn together into the
Neo-Platonic movement in Alexandria (2nd Cent. BC to 5th Cent AD)
where eclectic studies in all branches of learning were pursued.
When the Roman Emperor Constantine I was converted to
Christianity, his imperial edict was circulated to every portion
of the Roman empire, and by political force it caused the
eradication, abolition and proscription of every local religion
or philosophy. From Byzantium to England and Spain, from Norway
to Egypt, Christianity was established as the state religion.
The Reformation (and the freeing of men from the constriction of
the Church, and its unprovable dogmas, which had endured for a
thousand years) began the era of enlightenment which lasts to
this day - and the pursuit of knowledge without boundaries has
freed us all. In such an environment the doctrines of
Theosophy - the age-old wisdom - find ears and mind eager to
learn of it. It is the religion of freedom and responsibility.
If we desire to check, on an impartial and impersonal basis, all
statements, then we have to apply the Scientific method of
examination and analysis, also of comparison.
If after such an examination we discover that there are uniform
statements (laws and facts) concerning evolution, morals,
interaction, cooperation, and the description of some general
goal which is attainable by all, then that would be an expression
of universality and impartiality which any religion, philosophy,
psychology, science could accept.
When any such division of search and knowledge departs from those
facts and seeks to pin on mankind, or some group, the theories
and hypotheses as to beginnings, as to Deity, as to creation (or
evolution) that they think are necessary to explain the present
situation of Nature and mankind, that we have differences. In
many cases the theories when presented are not carefully labeled
as "hypothetical."
Every one of the Theologies, Sciences, Psychologies, etc...
derived from the One Source of fact and Law in the
World/Universe. AS time passes certain learned groups of men
develop creeds and dogmas to make (or persuade) their adherents
to become dependent on their claims of erudition and expertise.
The question really is: What have they studied ? Are they also
depending on unfounded theories, or, are they freely giving the
results of what they themselves have verified ? Are they
encouraging further independent research ?
In most cases examined it is found that the process of training
to some special position: as priests, conjurors, scientists,
scholars, academics, etc... turns out to develop a
"follow-the-leader" process and condition. Academic recognition
is given chiefly to those who conform rather closely to the
formulas that are currently in vogue. Very little lee-way is
given in most academic circles to an ardent and independent
investigator who seeks for the roots of knowledge. When the
mantle of "authority," is assumed, we find some of the "learned"
making claims for themselves based on their erudition.
Theosophy, declares that no one has a patent on Knowledge. The
first thing recommended to students is to seek to verify its
propositions, logic and doctrines for themselves. This
"do-it-yourself" approach does not please those who are mentally
lazy, or desire to take a "short-cut" and profit from the work of
others. They provide the base for the reign of "authority."
Those who make claims are antagonistic to Theosophy because it
demands "openness," or the exposure of all facts to individual
search. If the average man were to start seeking individually
the "position" of the "authority" would disappear. Their true
value is that they are at the forefront of present learning - an
advantage that cannot be taken from them unless they "take a
rest."
Theosophy states that there are no "secrets" in Nature other than
those which we have not yet discovered ourselves. There are many
realms and vast panoramas of knowledge to be accessed. And, in
all cases (Theosophy reminds us) we have as guide our own
interior IMMORTAL Spiritual SELF. This is the Perceiver and the
Thinker.
In terms of time and experience (Theosophy states) it has been
through the whole of Evolution and actually experienced every
aspect of progress. Its conscious Intelligence (Mind) is a
product of this vast work and effort, using many hundreds of
"personalities." It is the physical brain-mind that has to learn
how to recover those memories that are deeply embedded in the
INTUITION. The Tools of the Mind, Thought, Logic, Analysis,
Synthesis, and the WILL to accomplish this is the starting point
uniformly, for all of us.
>From this point of view Christianity contains at root everything
that is universal and impersonal. The Church, and the Churches,
have perverted, cut and pasted their ideas of what a congregation
ought to accept and believe in. On examination it will be found
that this is a far departure from original Wisdomism, or
THEOSOPHY, as a universal statement of facts in Nature.
And that is what I opine.
Best wishes,
Dallas
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 17:17:15 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA27870 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 17:05:05 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 23:04:12 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be53b7$576e0060$cd6545c2@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi Jerry and Dallas,
If I understood Dallas correctly, he is saying that Theosophy *explains* the
basis of brotherhood and it's importance, rather than just *says*
brotherhood and love is important. Below are just a few thoughts that
immediately come to mind.
Theosophy states that our ultimate essence is ONE and is that which is
'uncreate'.
"the root of every atom individually and of every form collectively, is that
seventh principle or the one Reality.." (SD)
However, Christianity teaches that we are *created* in the likeness of God.
There is already an inherent duality in this idea. The mystic who states
"verily I and thou art That" is blasphemous according to Christianity.
In Christianity, brotherhood applies only to human beings. The other
kingdoms of nature are here solely for the benefit of humans.
In Theosophy, Universal Brotherhood applies to all the kingdoms of nature
and extends throughout all the planes of consciousness and Being. "..for
every atom in the Universe has the potentiality of self-consciousness in it,
and is, like the Monads of Leibnitz, a Universe in itself, and for itself.
It is an atom and an angel." SD Vol 1 p 107
Thus Theosophy teaches that brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms of nature
for all are evolving and all will go through the stage of humanity (where
spirit and matter are in equilibrium). The Monadic essence travels through
all these stages...
"...ascending through all the degrees of intelligence, from the lowest to
the highest Manas, from mineral and plant, up to the holiest archangel
(Dhyani-Buddha)." SD Proem p17
Hence duty is that which is due to all that lives based on the above
principle of One-ness and evolutionary Law.
In contrast to this eternal pilgrimage of the soul, Christianity teaches
that for every new born human infant, God creates a new soul, even if that
infant never makes it out of the womb. Whether the soul is born into a life
of 'rags' or 'riches' is a matter of God's will rather than a result of
individual effort.
According to Christianity suffering is the will of God and it's origin is a
mystery to us for GOd's will cannot be known. Theosophy teaches that each
of us creates our own Karma. We alone are responsible for the suffering we
create for ourselves and for others. Our Karma is inextricably linked with
that of all beings. Theosophy states, lift a little of your own Karma and
you lift a little of the whole world's.
Theosophy teaches that Universal Brotherhood is a fact in nature rather than
an inherent human quality or a virtue to be cultivated.
Best wishes,
Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of Gerald
> Schueler
> Sent: 08 February 1999 16:03
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
>
>
> [Dallas]:< am aware of explains why "brotherhood" is so important. >>
>
> Surely you have heard that Christianity teaches us
> that God is Love. Surely you are aware that Jesus
> taught that we should all love one another, etc.
> As far as I know, ALL of the world's religions stress
> brotherhood. Its even in the 10 commandments.
> I was taught that God is love, and that we are made
> in His image and likeness, and that therefore brotherhood
> is an inherent human quality, close to godliness,
> back when I was a child.
>
> Jerry S.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 17:32:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA30960 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 17:32:08 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is the SOUL = the MIND
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 23:31:20 -0000
Message-ID: <000101be53bb$21a05ce0$cd6545c2@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <000901be5360$018f7fe0$9f0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Darren and Dallas,
Thanks for a thought provoking exchange of questions and ideas. It helps a
great many of us when people get together, sharing and exploring, extending
their own wisdom, even though we may just be 'listening'. Dallas, I agree
with you implied statement that having to respond and articulate our
understanding helps us to reflect on what it is we do and don't know about
the theme being explored.
It always surprises me how much there is to discover in the Secret Doctrine,
even on the same page that one has studied time and again over many years.
Best wishes
Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of W. Dallas
> TenBroeck
> Sent: 08 February 1999 12:39
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: RE: Theos-World A few questions on a touchy subject...What is
> the SOUL = the MIND
>
>
> Feb 9th
>
> Dear Darren:
>
> Your questions and statements made me so quite some "mastication"
> also, and that I enjoyed. There are so many valuable bits of
> information and help contained in the theosophical literature. I
> have always found it great entertainment to read and discover.
> Also, when I re-read things, visiting them again after some
> years, I find that my memory has faded - then, I am glad for the
> revival.
>
> Don't hesitate to come again anytime. It is good fun.
>
> "Masticate" -- reminds me of an old joke: the little Boston boy
> out for a stroll with his Nanny looked at a passing train and
> said to her: "Look at the masticate, masticate."
>
> Dal
>
> ============================================
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 8 18:26:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA02673 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 8 Feb 1999 18:08:48 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990209104514.007c47e0@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 10:45:14 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: RE: Theos-World ...What is the SOUL = the MIND / One Soul or
Many Souls
In-Reply-To: <000301be511b$794e6420$a20e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
References: <3.0.2.32.19990205135722.007c3aa0@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas;
You wrote:
>DALLAS: The Egoic Consciousness IS ONE AND UNCHANGED THROUGH
>EACH STATE THAT WE PASS. It serves to maintain the string of
>memory - or we would not be aware in retrospect of those states.
>In regard to the continued CONSCIOUSNESS of the Ego from life to
>life, since the brain is reconstructed afresh each incarnation
>from the scattered "life-atoms" (Skandhas) of earlier lives
>which are re-attracted to it as a Center, it forms the basis for
>our sense of "I-ness" and our character, capacities and talents
> or lack of these if they have not been developed earlier). This
>is what I get out of the Theosophical teachings.
**************************************************
This implies that we each have an individual continuum of existence albeit
with different personalities each incarnation. What I get from ISIS but not
necessarily from other HPB works is that the MONAD or divine unit has the
only continued existence and that it emanates in forms. Because the ONE
experiences everything, anything we as individuals do to ther indivuals
must be experienced by the one - hence KARMA.
*************************************************
>
>DALLAS I would not call it "insane" since the faculty of
>memory and of Egoity are at the base of our consciousness.
>Confused perhaps, at times, but usually prepared to consider new
>ideas, and sustain its own interest in verifying them
>
>Theosophically, as I see it:
>
>Perception is the faculty of the Spirit - Atma
>
>Wisdom as the memory of the effects of past choices (and their
>results) is the faculty of Buddhi - the Spiritual Mind
>
>Reasoning, ratiocination, logic, inquiring, planning are
>faculties of the Mind/soul (Manas).
>
>Desire, emotion, want, egoism and selfishness (or KAMA), (to me)
>identify the Mind enveloped in the passional nature (Kama-Manas).
>This is the Lower, the embodied mind presently as we are AWAKE,
>it is resident and dominant in our waking minds just now.
>
>When the waking mind is able to perceive "needs" as different
>from, and often opposed to "wants" then the possibility of
>perceiving the Kamic-principle ("Desires & Passions") as a
>principle separate from the mind.
>
>Thus we have:
>
>1. Spirit - perception (it is unitized in us, but is also not
>separate from the
> ONE SPIRIT - which is EVERYTHING at its ROOT. When this
>manifests as a unit, a form is needed, and Wisdom (Buddhi) is
>that first "form."
>2. Wisdom - memory of all experiences (universal vision and
>memory of past events)
>3. Mind - memory, imagination, anticipation, this is the area of
>action and creativity. It can foresee potential results.
>4. Desire and Passion - a faculty of selfishness and the desire
>to acquire and to own. It is incapable when dissociated from
>the Mind of foresight.
****************************************
Is Wisdom memory though? (see p591 ISIS UNVEILED Book II) Memory has been
called Phantasy - maybe to delineate it from Akasic record. Pastlife recall
then could be said to have been access to akasic record rather than actual
'memory'.
********************************
>DALLAS: The series of question is only to open the mind to other
>possibilities as one develops the next. No compulsion, only
>sincere wonder on my part - following how I develop a line of
>questions - for you to compare with your own line.
********************************
But would you say we start with the same premises or possibly the idea of a
set conclusion that we hope our reasoning will lead to?
********************************
>Why would we equate NIRVANA with bliss-and absence of "pain ?"
>If it is non-dual (and I would agree to this, on a very long time
>consideration, as to the time that can be spent in that state, it
>is still limited in terms of ultimate time. I say this because
>within the ALL or the ONE, it is a limitation. It is not THE
>ALL.
********************************
Perhaps here is where we break down because of the definitions. I agree
completely with what you say - my problem I think has been identifying the
'timeless state' - the theoretical primal condition of the absolute in any
any unchanged, manifested, emanation form - without disturbance - with
NIRVANA. But as you say, any condition one can return to from must have not
been that zero state. Thus the Nirvana of mystics is more like Samadhi ??
*******************************
>DALLAS To me it would seem so, since dissociating ourselves as
>"Perceivers" from any kind of "perception," and "pain" is such,
>the state achieved would not be an ultimate, or TRUE
>"zero-point."
>
>To me the "primordial unmanifested state" is present as the base
>for the Atmic Perception since it is the only thing that is
>completely in contrast with temporary forms, states - all such
>being aspects of MAYA-illusion. Only the UNCHANGED PERCEIVES
>CHANGE. Hence I said that CONSCIOUSNESS does not vary according
>to the states we experience, but records what happens there,
>using BUDDHI as the base for such recording in its AKASIC sense
>(or aspect).
***************************************
Akasa must then be the sum of all things for all time or one and the same
with Maya. Manifesting through a holographic nature. This contiuum or
pleroma has consciousness as one its aspects...consciousness then divided
by arbitrary boundaries where in fact there are none...and consciousness
itself must then be Maya. Who then is the dreamer?
****************************************
>DALLAS Not to "end it" but, to understand it, and be able to
>prevent it as influence, from taking over the mind. Holding the
>Mind and its perception power (derived from the One Spirit) from
>being overwhelmed in a sense of selfish possessiveness or selfish
>rejection of the pain of loss or the incapacity to change outer
>circumstances for one's self or for others.
***************************************
Because of these arbitrary boundary's we call sensory bodies?? Selfishness
then is itself an illusion if there is no real individual self only the
UNIVERSAL SOUL which I may again be erroneously equating with the MONAD.
****************************************
>DALLAS In a way I think you are right. Since we are involved in
>manifestation, the karma of our past, and the circumstances of
>our present, and we face the consequences of our present choices,
>we ought to ask ourselves "Why are we here ?" Is there some duty
>(dharma) which we ought to be learning how to perform ?
****************************************
This is a question that plays on my mind a lot. Is there NECESSITY? Is
one's individual Dharma reflective of the dharma of the MONAD - as above
and so below? If it is supposedly better not to exist then why leave that
primal state? Was it out of NECESSITY or DESIRE? (this is where I wish I
knew more NORSE mythology - especially the 3 fates Clothos? etc)
Is the Dharma to be a cog in a great machine or is it to be an individual?
as Cake say:
Sheep go to heaven - Goats go to hell.
******************************************
>Becoming universalized and personally detached from our emotional
>bondage is probably the clearest method we can first adopt. But
>on second thought, even that is selfish, because while it might
>liberate us from "pain and suffering" by achieving a personal and
>selfish NIRVANA - the so-anticipated bliss of non-involvement -
>it does not take into account our duties and responsibilities due
>to our family, friends, and our whole environment. And that is
>still rather difficult to define. It spreads out around us and
>to achieve true liberation from suffering, those beings, friends,
>family ought to be liberated also. So we are in a way back to
>square one, and if we have compassion we may decide to renounce a
>personal Nirvana, and remain to assist and "show the way" to
>others who seek it.
**********************************************
I get the impression of the idea of Nirvana that most people adhere to is a
state where it would be impossible to have a 'choice' in either staying or
leaving. From what I understand of most Tibetan Lamas they renounce Nirvana
in advance and deliberately accumulate karma to avoid it....this would
indicate that if they were to achieve liberation upon death they would have
no way to cause incarnation again...as karma would be zero in theory.
Having said that though this would have also been the starting point or
primordial condition of all manifest beings and yet here we are....
**********************************************
>To me the concept of compassion and the need for cooperation and
>co-existence would overwhelm any desire for a personal "rest" and
>"bliss."
***********************************************
Unless one equates unity consciousness as a merging with absolute, and thus
the personal or relative would indeed be the universal, and any rest or
bliss would also be universal. I'm not sure if we can use logic or
reasoning to talk about these things though.
************************************************
>DALLAS That is exactly my own thought. There has to be an answer
>to this which is reliable. In answering this we firs have to
>determine who and what we are. Our took is the mind. It is
>driven by the "desire to known the truth." And finally our "will"
>drives the process of learning and focuses our attention, so we
>can concentrate and mediate on all relevant aspects of this
>search.
*************************************************
AH - the mystic vision! We started with the wrong premise....we looked
outward...and as above so below...the absolute itself looked outside for
the the truth. This WILL or DESIRE is the cause of all things in their
manifested nature...But it is what the mayans call the Dreamspell. We are
so locked up in examining it we have gotten continually further from the
truth. But when will a personal salvation equate with universal salvation -
and is there any NECESSITY involved in either?
*************************************************
>Dallas asked:
>>Of what value to us is a state in which we assume it is blissful
>>if nothing is done or contemplated or felt or contacted ?
>
>Darren:These are human concerns.
DALLAS This implies mental action.
>
**************************************************
We assume as HUMANS that we are as Beck would say 'where it's at'. The
focus of attention is the focus of the universal omnipresent attention -
the higher self or Aged of the Ages. So GOD loves to dream.
***************************************************
>>This is the Ego talking - it loves the security of this
>>existence - it even
>>puts up with the pain because it is more afraid of what the unity
>>consciousness existence implies.
>
>DALLAS I quite agree. But it is "afraid" of the implications of
>"unity" with the One Consciousness, because, being inexperienced,
>it has not understood the value of the Laws of nature and their
>universality. Once that it grasps that aspect of the situation,
>it becomes reconciled to its being improved through
>universalization and adjustment to an un-selfish future. In
>other words the isolation and selfishness of KAMA is transmuted
>into KAMADEVA - the "all-embracing" desire (such as the Buddha or
>the Jain Tirthankaras showed) for the benefit of all beings. And
>for this reason such beings who arise from the merely human-mind
>condition become the NIRMANAKAYAS - those who remain with the
>world and humanity in order to assist all to improve by
>self-effort. [ If you have a copy of HPB's THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY
>see "Kamadeva" p. 170. ]
*********************************************************
This is another of my stumbling blocks - the Nirmanakaya - A nebulous
concept at best. Who is an example of a Nirmanakaya? Or is this something
we have to take on faith?
*********************************************************
>DALLAS I agree but to overcome fear need knowledge and that
>requires education and self-training in universal concepts of law
>in living. Is not the "Dark-side" selfishness and isolation ?
>"Me" against the rest of the world and everybody in it ?
>Of what value is that in the long run? Does it eliminate pain
>and sorrow or increase it ?
**********************************************
Sorry to Harp back to Bulwer-Lytton's 'A Strange Story', but don't we
encounter fear when we push aside any type of experience becuase of how we
see the results or effects? I'm not disagreeing with any statement you've
made re: The Dark Side - I'm sort of taking Jung's view of making contact
with the animus.
*********************************************>
>DALLAS Theosophy as espoused by the T S is nebulous. Theosophy
>as taught by HPB is definite (see KEY TO THEOSOPHY for instance)
>HPB teaches of Devachan and the "in-between lives" states and
>explains their reason for so being there. The teachings are
>orderly and well reasoned. I am not sure that the "T S" as a
>group is fully aware of those, as my contact through this
>chat-group shows they as a generality are unfamiliar with that
>which HPB taught.
*******************************
Obviously as a beginner I have not been able to read everything HPB wrote -
I keep finding myself investigating side track issues constantly - But I
have read the Key, ISIS and SD and had not encountered the equation of
devachan and bardo states. Thankyou to Jerry ( I think :)) for pointing out
the reconciliation in a G De Purucker book....This may be what I need to
'tidy' up my mental picture.
*******************************
>Now, to characterize HPB's teaching as "Victorian" is belittling
>it, perhaps unintentionally, and without understanding what she
>tried to convey. Truth is not dated by Victoria, Elizabeth II,
>or any era. It is timeless.
*******
see note below
*******>
>HPB's language is very clear to me, and it is only in the last
>few years that I hear the belittling phrase launched at her work
>as "Victorian."
>
>Well suppose that it is "Victorian" - Does that make it less true
>? Do we respect Shakespeare, or Tennyson, or Shopenhauer,
>Goethe, Descartes, Paracelsus, Jesus, Buddha, Byron, Emerson,
>Thoreau, Bronson Alcott or the Brownings or Coleridge, Addison,
>Ruskin, Lincoln, etc., the less because of their era and age?
>
>Or is the implication that since she taught (and all that we know
>today of the universal doctrines and reasoning of Theosophy is
>based on that), the English language has changed so much (in 110
>years) that we do not understand her any more ? I sense that a
>subtle barrier has been erected to distract students from going
>to her and seeing what she actually said. Now I wonder why that
>should be so ? Is it because Science has advanced and many of
>the prophecies and hints she dropped have been fulfilled since
>she wrote them? Or is it that her philosophy has been so far
>unassailed in any serous manner? I really wonder why and where
>this demeaning arose, and especially who have not studied her
>works. Very curious. I've worked at and used them for over 50
>years and find them refreshingly interesting as I survey them
>when confronted with fresh questions.
**************************************
Actually No I agree with what you're saying but it's not what HPB did say -
which she said very well - but with what she didn't say. And I think that
she didn't mention some things because a) They were not necessary at that
time b) The would have turned church led public opinion against her even
more and c) Even she herself said that she was only painting the picture as
best as she could at that time. I'm sure if she had managed another 15-20
years we would have volumes more work and a lot of work would have been
re-edited..possibly extensively. But nothing to change the underlying
message of course.
**************************************
>>I'm sort of following the Socratic 'questioning model'. Often I
>>will say
>>stuff that I may not necessarily believe in, just to provoke
>>lively debate
>>and discussion.
>
>DALLAS Quite so. And so we continue this quest.
**************************
Wow I just had an epiphany reading that statement. It implies two things -
one their is a quest - and two possibly there is a goal. Is the goal
attainable or does it matter? Would you say that Theosophy teaches an
endless evolution in periodic manifestation but with succeeding
improvements (paranirvana, paraparanirvana etc) as opposed to the Buddhist
teaching that there is an endless cycle (the wheel of life) but of which
there is a solution to - cessation of existence?
This dialogue has helped my understanding of the differences between
Buddhism and Theosophy no end. Thankyou Dallas.
******************************
Namaste,
Darren
*************************
Are you on my mailing list?
If you would like to join Nos's Worldwide Soapbox please send email to my
address with subject line - "Yes I am Ready Oh Great One" or something
similar.
If you would like to cancel subscription then please send an email
detainling for me in 300 words what good reasons you have to cancel. Oh and
put in the Header -
"I can't handle the truth"
**************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 9 00:47:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id AAA08693 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 00:41:49 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <36BFD985.39222BAC@lainet.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:45:30 -0800
From: Martin Leiderman
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
References: <000001be53b7$576e0060$cd6545c2@et.u-net.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Peter Merriott wrote:
>
> Thus Theosophy teaches that brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms of nature
> for all are evolving and all will go through the stage of humanity (where
> spirit and matter are in equilibrium). The Monadic essence travels through
> all these stages...
Now, Peter, even though I agree with you on the above statement, I have problem
applying it in the following situation:
If I see a human baby, a puppy, a little plant, etc falling in a lake at the
same time, even though I know that the Monad is in all of them I would save the
baby first.
Because of ... I don't have to explain it.
After saving the baby, I may try to save the puppy, and so on.
I don't think that the above Theosophical statement implies that rescuing the
plan, animal, baby has the same moral value.
How do you apply the idea of: " brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms of
nature"
This question is not only for Peter, but to anyone who sincerely is trying to
live theosophical principles and not only talking about them.
Martin Leiderman
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 9 08:47:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA11818 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 08:45:32 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 09:39:54 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World No Need to Renounce Nirvana
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>>From what I understand of most Tibetan Lamas they renounce Nirvana in
advance and deliberately accumulate karma to avoid it....this would
indicate that if they were to achieve liberation upon death they would
have no way to cause incarnation again...as karma would be zero in
theory.<<
There is no need to "renounce" anything nor to "deliberately accumulate
karma." The desire to help others is sufficient to bring anyone back
into a new life and it is this desire that separates the Mahayana from
the Therevadin.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 9 13:40:31 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id NAA16686 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 13:29:12 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 12:28:51 -0800
Message-ID: <000201be546a$d0a826a0$b30e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <36BFD985.39222BAC@lainet.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 9th 1999
Dear Martin:
I append some notes to your MSG below. Thanks Dal
*************************************
From: Martin Leiderman
Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Peter Merriott wrote:
>
> Thus Theosophy teaches that brotherhood encompasses all
kingdoms of nature
> for all are evolving and all will go through the stage of
humanity (where
> spirit and matter are in equilibrium). The Monadic essence
travels through
> all these stages...
Now, Peter, even though I agree with you on the above statement,
I have problem
applying it in the following situation:
If I see a human baby, a puppy, a little plant, etc falling in a
lake at the
same time, even though I know that the Monad is in all of them I
would save the
baby first. Because of ... I don't have to explain it.
After saving the baby, I may try to save the puppy, and so on.
I don't think that the above Theosophical statement implies that
rescuing the
plan, animal, baby has the same moral value. How do you apply
the idea of: " brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms of nature"
This question is not only for Peter, but to anyone who sincerely
is trying to live theosophical principles and not only talking
about them. Martin Leiderman
Dallas offers these thoughts:
This seems to be a matter of common sense, Martin - the normal
reaction is to preserve if possible that form in which the
highest manifestation of evolution is present. So the child
would receive first attention and then in descending order the
rest. It is a question as usual of our reaction to Karmic
circumstances.
Do we meet the test of brotherliness, self-sacrifice, and are we
able to discern that which is necessary and essential ? I think
in our own progress in evolution we have to develop owed by
"concentration" and "meditation." Once we review and figure out
the reason for things we add to our own effectiveness in the
future.
Is this not again an example of studying the moral/ethical
condition ? If we look inside our own selves, at our possible
motives and knowledge, what do we find as an ideal, a universal
or impartial answer ?
And having decided on such an answer, how do we proceed to verify
it, using the information we already possess ? Only the Mind can
do this. Our progress, as I understand Theosophy to teaches
shows us how the moral/ethical aspect of progress (brotherhood in
action) helps develop the whole mind and humanizes the Mind
function.
Yes, as I understand it, the MONAD in each case, has assembled
the monads of lesser experience to frame the "form" in which It
lives, cannot die, any more than those "lesser" monads (or
'skandhas') which were drawn by mutual karmic attraction to help
make up the form - they are dispersed, and then recombine again
under their own karmic programs. Those are the "carriers" of
"our" Karma-as developing "human" and benevolent natures which
actively desire to cooperate with all Life.
I think this may, as just stated, sound too analytical and
cold-hearted. But the impartial power of thought does that on
its own. It is always to be found balanced between two extremes:
the selfish isolation of the "personality" - our present "mask;"
and the unselfish brotherliness of the compassionate Idea. The
important point to grasp, I think is that WE USE THE MIND AS A
TOOL. WE, are not only the Mind.
Let me frame two alternative attitudes that I think may answer
the question, using the 7 principles of Man as are to be found
described in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY.
In alliance with the Kamic nature, it (the Mind) is allowed to
frame visions of the future that sympathize with results that
please the emotional nature, regardless of the effect its actions
may have on others. It is selfish to that extent. It expects a
reward. It often expects to be recognized and exalted among its
peers. To that extent it is self-centered and does not really
care for brotherhood as an ideal, but only uses that as an
appearance when it suits it to present its motives as acts to
others. To that extent we could say it is hypocrisy in action.
[ Our modern psychology, taken in a large sense, defends,
justifies and seeks to apologizes for this attitude. ] [ In
contrast our Laws in most countries, seek to set down a code that
is uniform as a moral base, for a fair degree of impersonal, yet
caring interaction among humans. Those statutes seek to balance
any selfishness against an ideal behavior involving
self-restraint and regard for other's needs and rights. To the
extent that they succeed, they support brotherhood as a fact of
life to be practiced by all.]
This weeks' US NEWS & WORLD REPORT carries a most interesting
article on animal self-sacrifice and benevolence, which is a
puzzle for those behavioral psychologists who have adopted the
theory of "Natural Selection," by means of "The Survival of the
Fittest." The examples noticed there contradict, and puzzle
them. In Nature when animals live without human influence the
Kamic principle develops under Natural Impulse as Instinct. In
the higher animals, Theosophy teaches, it comes almost to the
human point and is ready to be bonded with Mind (which at a
certain point mid-way in a Manvantara, is "lit-up" by advanced
Minds - a process similar to the education of young children in a
family and at school), and this may bring about the alliance and
oversight of a perfected MIND, which will serve it (as THE HIGHER
SELF) as a non-interfering tutor for its further "human"
developmental progress. [see SD II 161-3 102-3 167 176 243 SD I
573] -- I am putting this in very briefly and perhaps crudely.
I found that HPB explains this in her TRANSACTIONS OF THE
BLAVATSKY LODGE between pages 66 to 76 (ULT edition).
2. In alliance with the Buddhic nature (the altruistic,
compassionate and unselfish attitude, based on brotherliness as a
Universal Fact) it, (the Mind) frames visions of an ideal future
in which it has served another aspect of Life (the child, etc. in
peril) in a condition of difficulty. It does not do this from
the hope for a personal or selfish "reward," but simply because
it was in a Karmic situation in which it could act benevolently
as a matter of course. It pays no special attention to how
others regard it. [ The BHAGAVAD GITA teaches this as dispassion
in right action. And so also does Jesus, Buddha, Lao-Tze and all
great Sages and Prophets say the same.] It acts because it is
there in a position to act and help.
I hope that this is of help. It embodies some of what I have
secured from HPB's teachings as to the psycho-mental nature of
man, as to what is evolving in each of us.
In the KEY TO THEOSOPHY (original edition) I have found the
tables that HPB gives on the pages 91-2 135-6 and 175-6 to be
valuable. In many of the pages before those (the tables
summarize that which was taught just before them) she gives
valuable information concerning the interplay of our cognitive,
emotional, and choosing capabilities. She also shows that the 7
"principles" were well known in several of the ancient
philosophies and religions. Modern Theosophy is a representation
of ancient truths.
Best wishes,
Dallas
**************************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 9 19:57:36 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA25698 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 9 Feb 1999 19:22:35 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World ...What is the SOUL = the MIND / One Soul or Many Souls
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 18:22:06 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be549c$2bfa2e00$500e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990209104514.007c47e0@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 8th 1999
Dear Peter Darren:
I read your notes appended to my rather lengthy answer which you
said you would "masticate."
I would observe that ISIS UNVEILED was the opening "blast" of
theosophical light cast on a world that needed to be reminded of
a unified time in the past when knowledge and wisdom were one.
It is a great catalog of occult information. The explanations
that it gives (the wording and details) were then made more
precise in correspondence, answers and articles up to and beyond
the publishing of THE SECRET DOCTRINE in 1888. HPB continues
writing till her death (1891)in LUCIFER magazine and elsewhere.
Between ISIS and the publishing of THE SECRET DOCTRINE 11 years
elapsed (1877 to 1888) and in the interim HPB published many
articles in answer to queries raised by ISIS. The magazines
THEOSOPHIST (began October 1879 in Bombay) and LUCIFER (began
September 1887 in London) carried most of these. The series of
books published by the TPH (Theos. Pub. House, Adyar, etc.)
BLAVATSKY - COLLECTED WORKS has brought into one compass, most if
not all her writings (with the exception of her many LETTERS) in
a chronological manner.
I mention this because some of the terms used in ISIS became
amplified and in some cases modified in later explanations. We
ought also to remember that Mr. A. P. Sinnett published two
important books as a result of his correspondence (through HPB)
with the Masters of Wisdom: "Esoteric Buddhism" and "The Occult
World." For instance in SD and THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY you will
find HPB gives information about the "Three Fundamentals" of
Theosophy [ God - Law - Being (Evolution of all beings as a
continuous program) ]. Then she also gives the SEVEN-FOLD table
of PRINCIPLES in the Universe and in Man.
The purpose of this, as I read in Theosophy, is to establish
those basic concepts with Theosophy offers. Of special
importance is the evolution and progress of the MIND. Three
lines of Evolution are mentioned (SD I 181) Spiritual (Or
Monadic - Spirit and wisdom), Mental [ Mind and psyche as
"passions and desires" ] and Material [ as physical and astral
bodies ]. These are intertwined and interlaced at all points and
in the SD she sets to work to show us how. This is valuable, as
it gives the basis for understanding how the immortal MONAD works
in Matter and develops eventually the higher capacities of MIND,
the independence of free-thought and freedom of choice. In this
It is assisted by MONAD-MINDS that are in advance of it in terms
of progress - in other words the Sages of earlier cycles of human
progress (our "elder Brothers") assist we, who are not in the
stage or learners, and may actively become their disciples. It
is an educative program from one end to the other. It is not in
any way something enforced or compelled, but the responsible
freedom of man is posited and emphasized, so that when knowledge
and power to use that knowledge are acquired, it will be employed
for the benefit of the World in a universally harmless and
constructive manner.
In one way it is possible to say that from the undiscoverable and
indefinable ONE SOURCE emanates the whole tripartite
manifestation. Spirit and matter are polar opposites. Mind is
the neutral center that observes the other two in their
innumerable combinations and progress. Mind as a faculty is
directly linked to the ONE.
Now let me offer some comments on your statements. Instead of
reproducing them in a lengthy document I have numbered them
arbitrarily and then numbered my paragraphs below so that they
could be related by you. Naturally nothing is settled, but ideas
are sent so that we can consider and see if there is some
agreement. So you will have to go on further, and let me know if
there are some more concepts to be clarified.
1. The INDIVIDUALITY (MONAD) is the imperishable Three-in-One:
ATMA-BUDDHI-MANAS. It reincarnates using many personalities.
The PERSONALITIES are composed of Monads that are developing (in
various conditions of "matter") towards their own eventual
independence. For the provision of man's personality 4
components are needed: physical matter, astral matter, life
energy and the power of instinct/sensitivity, emotion and
desire -Kama.
2. Wisdom-memory-thought. Isis II 591 the use of the word
"phantasy" was by Olimpiodorus. It is one of the capacities of
clairvoyance (being described earlier there) of seeing the
outlines of probable Karmic results in the astral or the Akasic
"lights." Ordinary "phantasy" is the projected images of the
Mind entwined in desire and therefor it projects selfish and
personal views of what we would like to have occur to satisfy a
personal desire. Fantasy, "Castles in Spain," etc... are selfish
and useless for true progress because they ultimately work
against the force of universal evolution. Therefore Theosophy
enjoins the study of Nature and her Laws. Within those confines
we are all "bound, yet free." The final question for us all will
be: "Do you wish to be wise in all things in the Universe ?"
Or, "do you wish to become an isolated fraction of that whole,
and totally immersed in your own desires and selfishness, and
thus be out of touch with Reality ?" ( or" Do you/we want to
immure ourself in ignorance ?)
3. The power of the mind to develop any line of thought is
defined by the motive and the intent of the user. If it is
selfish, or only partially wise, the pictures defined are limited
by that premise. {Patanjali's Yoga sutras are of assistance in
understanding this. It is a most marvelous discussion of the
power of the mind and how it can be used, or abused. Try and get
a copy of W.Q.Judge's translation.)
It is quite impossible for we who live within limits, forms and
conditions to frame any idea of the ABSOLUTENESS and its "states
and conditions" if any. The reason for this is that once
manifestation starts again, everything is an aspect of
SUBSTANCE/MATTER. These imply limitations from the grossest to
the most ethereal forms. Even Spirit is a "form" and a "limit"
when compared to its SOURCE in the ABSOLUTENESS. Stretching back
to some BEGINNING our minds meet with this blankness. It is not
that it is non-existent. It is rather, that we cannot penetrate
to its ALL-PRESENCE. It terms of thought it is truly universal
and none of us can "escape" from IT. And that is about all I can
think or say, so far as I am able to derive conclusions from
Theosophy or any other system I have investigated.
Nirvana is indicative of a period of personal rest that can be
secured by a developed MONAD that, having learned all it can in
any one period of manifestation (MANVANTARA) elects to take a
rest and wait out the time when Karma will compel it to return to
work in a fresh MANVANTARA. A long time indeed, but essentially
a very spiritually selfish view point. This is what a PRATYEKHA
BUDDHA does (see explanations in VOICE OF THE SILENCE p. 47
footnote, 77-8 "Dharmakaya.") Nirvana is not PRALAYA, though it
may seem like that to the one who elects to take that mind of
rest. In THE SECRET DOCTRINE, II p. 79-80 HPB states that some
of the beings returning to live as humans may be "returning
Nirvanees from preceding Maha-Manvantaras." I find that quite
suggestive. See also footnote SD II 233, 254-5, and footnote on
255.)
4. Akasa has a number of attributes. One has to look for them in
the SD Index and assemble them. Chiefly, it is the eternal
record of every Monad's experiences. It does not vary, nor does
it disappear. It therefore is a record of history as well as of
the adventures of every Monad. Our past is there for the Wise to
review if necessary and for us to see when we have developed the
wisdom and fortitude to stand such a perception. It is not used
for curiosity "surfing," but stands as a fact available for those
who may need it.
MAYA is the illusion or rather the delusion of the personal and
selfish consciousness and is associated with the ASTRAL LIGHT.
It does not contact the AKASA. Contacting images from the astral
light would be fanciful or "phantasy." The "dreamer" is the same
unit of CONSCIOUSNESS which just now is awake, writing or reading
these notes. In retrospect our dreams of last night, if and when
we remember them (or experience them as "lucid dream" conditions
when semi-awake) are fragmentary and difficult to make coherent.
Some dreams are very coherent and deeply impressed in our
memories, but that is rather seldom. We have not, usually,
developed much control over our dreams. Read HPB's TRANSACTIONS
OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE, pp 66 - 78. There you will find one of
the finest discussions on dreams available and definitions as to
what aspect of our consciousness is aware and active and what is
passive and receptive. A working knowledge of the 7 principles
of man is essential to do this. The "dreamer" is always the ONE
CONSCIOUSNESS that is our true self, the decision maker and the
user of the Mind as of all other faculties. It is the pupil
working in the school of Life from incarnation to incarnation and
using all the many personalities. Our character and capacities
are evidence of what we have learned and also indicate what
remains for us to learn.
6. Selfishness is indeed mayavic - a delusion - as hinted above.
It selfishness is the cause of inferior, base and tyrannical
motives. Those are not of the nature of universality or of
brotherhood. This fact that wisdom is only to be obtained by
moral/ethical and brotherhood behavior and motive is one of the
most difficult, as well as the most important ideas to grasp.
7. You seem to confuse the idea of the UNIVERSAL SOUL with our
own Soul Identity. Our identity is our identity. The Soul is
the MIND. It is your Monad which is using and working through
the mental faculties. The Mind serves to link the creative
SPIRITUAL powers and forces with the MATERIAL FORMS and
LIMITATIONS. In great Nature or the UNIVERSE IN MANIFESTATION
there is a corresponding link which consists of the united
faculties of all Mind-beings.
Mind-beings cover a vast range: from the Wisest and most ancient
of Sages and Prophets, to the latest baby whose mind is
potential. Selfishness is an active condition, a motivational
stand taken when the mind links itself up with desire. We are
all at present while awake, Kama-manasic beings or minds linked
with desire. Our work is to impersonalize and universalize the
desire principle in us, thus restoring it (in us) to its divine
condition as the power that causes the unity of all beings. It
(as a universal Force) is BROTHERHOOD carried to its highest and
most noble level.
It is the universal cement that unites all living things and the
source of LAW and justice and fairness. Some term it divine
love. In another way we could call it the UNIVERSAL MONAD in
which and from which all individual Monads have emerged. No this
many be asking you to stretch your mind a good deal, but words
are such limiting traps. It is the story of the "Eye" versus the
"Heart" doctrine, always.
8. Necessity is a good question. Why not simply say we are all
here together. We are all asking why. And this kind of
discussion brings out what we know and don't know. Some surmises
are then checked out to see if they are valid or not in other
minds. If you have the SD, check vol. 2, p. 176 top on Desire
(Universal Desire) also something is written on that on II p.
578-9 and 484 bottom. One thing is sure: we are not the
playthings of some vast Power. And certainly not of a whimsical
and cruel "Personal God." The fact that there are so many
religions and beliefs, and there is no move to either unify them
or erase them, ought to make it plain that they are constructed
by men to subjugate others. Hence they befuddle the mind.
9. As far as I know the "renunciation of Nirvana is something
that is done as a final action. See VOICE OF THE SILENCE p.
78-9.
10. In our innermost being we, (as well as all other beings) are
united as ONE in the ABSOLUTENESS. In our present consciousness
we see ourselves as separate in many ways, and act according to
our desires or notions. In this life we are (or ought to be)
seeking to acquire wisdom - a wisdom which consciously gives us
the basis to unite and to behave with each others as the
primordial UNITY mandates. We have to become consciously and
deliberately brothers to all beings in Nature. We are learning
to do this with our MINDS which, for the moment, are isolated,
embraced by desire (Kama) and confused by the delusion that we
are "all-important." The Lode-star that directs us to
understanding is that which we sense interiorly to be justice and
fairness for all because everyone else has the same senses,
powers and faculties. In this way BROTHERHOOD is the key, as it
changes "passion" into "compassion." Knowledge, wisdom and
compassion do this. Selfishness and passion does the reverse.
11. The "Dreamspell" of the Mayas is an illustration of the
present mind-desire linkage. It produces selfishness. When we
see the alternative, we make the effort to break the "spell."
Necessity is the pathway that leads on in our own evolution. We
begin to "widen out to the Universal."
12. "GOD loves to dream." If you mean our condition and the
condition of most of us - it is so. The inner GOD is deluded by
the distractions of desire and passion. This sounds very much
like the Buddhist teachings, and it is, for simplicity. But it
is essentially the inner GOD that fights its way out of the
delusion by seeking for facts and knowledge and then looks for
the right way to apply that. That leads to "right motive."
Again, repeating: universalism, fairness, justice and
compassion.
13. Nirmanakaya is a Bodhisattva who chooses not to enter
Nirvana, but remain behind with mankind to be of assistance to
its progress. Instead of using a physical body it lives in a
very pure "astral body" that it has constructed itself during the
progress of self-purification. There is a wonderful article
written on this subject and reprinted in the book FIVE YEARS OF
THEOSOPHY: "the Elixir of Life." You ought to read this.
Suffice to say the "astral light" is 7-fold and in its highest
aspect it is the AKASA. This body of a Nirmanakaya is Akasic
substance. For definitions use the SD Index and the THEOSOPHICAL
GLOSSARY by HPB.
14. A STRANGE STORY is a marvelous example of how those who are
closely allied in nature affect one another for good and ill.
And "fear" is related to loss or change of the personality. When
one is quite convinced that the personality will change, and that
ultimately its death is inevitable, one acquires the strength to
reject the pressures of fear, and demand truth regardless of
consequences. So our body dies. So we reincarnate. Difficult
for some and not so difficult for others to use as a basic idea.
Ultimately this will have to be realized by all. To the extent
that we become our own masters, and know our natures thoroughly,
so rapidly or slowly will we be able to progress in true
knowledge and wise living. As to Jung's "making contact with the
animus" - it has two meanings apparently: 1.) animating or
actuating spirit, and 2.) a feeling or spirit of hostility or
hatred and animosity. The first seems neutral enough, as our
motive lend it coloring, morally. The second in on the "Dark
Side" as I suggested. But that needs to be defined, each for
himself. Jung devised special words to serve as short-cuts in
conveying ideas. Theosophy does the same, but it also simplifies
and tries to make relations clear when conveying concepts. Why
need the "dark side" be encouraged? Who created it? If we can
determine that we will know what to do.
15. Bardo needs adjustment with the Theosophical concepts. KEY
TO THEOSOPHY on after-death states ought to be used.
16. As to what HPB may not have said - that is speculation. If
one reads extensively what she wrote, most problems get cleared
up. The theosophical fundamentals have to be kept in mind and
verified again and again as we proceed and meet fresh problems in
understanding. Jung tried to make sense of the personality - of
Kama-Manas. HPB describes the whole of man's psychology and
starts with the premise that we are observing in ourselves the
evolution of an immortal Monad.
17. As to the future - I have made a few statements earlier as to
its continuity for us. Let's take a professor with a couple of
doctorates. Is that the end for him? Is there more for him to
master? Does he not make those decisions now for himself ?
Best wishes to you, Dal
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 05:32:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id FAA08373 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 05:23:33 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Teos9@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 06:21:53 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World ...What is the SOUL = the MIND / One Soul or Many Souls
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/9/99 9:06:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, dalval@nwc.net
writes:
<< Akasa has a number of attributes. One has to look for them in
the SD Index and assemble them. Chiefly, it is the eternal
record of every Monad's experiences. It does not vary, nor does
it disappear. It therefore is a record of history as well as of
the adventures of every Monad. Our past is there for the Wise to
review if necessary and for us to see when we have developed the
wisdom and fortitude to stand such a perception. It is not used
for curiosity "surfing," but stands as a fact available for those
who may need it. >>
Dear Dallas:
Nice definitions, as usual. I would only add the often unmentioned part of
any discussion when it comes to Akasha or Karma. It is important to keep in
mind that what is being recorded by and for evolutionary aspects, are actions
on the physical, astral/emotional and mental planes. Its all one piece. So,
even though we can rationalize a certain behavior to give a terrible deed, a
softer look, here, on this plane, the Akashic record, captures the exact
feelings and intent that accompany the behavior action as it occurs. Thus
setting up the karmic legacy of each moment ... in each moment.
How much more meaningful the old adage becomes: "We can lie to each other but
we CANNOT lie to ourselves." Especially in these days.
Keep up the great work.
Louis A. Deluca
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 09:32:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA27167 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 09:24:56 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World ...What is the SOUL = the MIND / One Soul or Many Souls
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 08:24:44 -0800
Message-ID: <000201be5511$de5574e0$9e0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 10th
Thanks Louis:
What you added is well said and exact as I understand it. What
is expressed there is the motive. Choice is everything.
Dal
=========================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Teos9@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 1999 3:22 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World ...What is the SOUL = the MIND / One
Soul or Many Souls
<< Akasa has a number of attributes. One has to look for them in
the SD Index and assemble them. Chiefly, it is the eternal
record of every Monad's experiences. It does not vary, nor does
it disappear. It therefore is a record of history as well as of
the adventures of every Monad. Our past is there for the Wise
to
review if necessary and for us to see when we have developed the
wisdom and fortitude to stand such a perception. It is not used
for curiosity "surfing," but stands as a fact available for
those
who may need it. >>
Dear Dallas:
Nice definitions, as usual. I would only add the often
unmentioned part of
any discussion when it comes to Akasha or Karma. It is important
to keep in
mind that what is being recorded by and for evolutionary aspects,
are actions
on the physical, astral/emotional and mental planes. Its all one
piece. So,
even though we can rationalize a certain behavior to give a
terrible deed, a
softer look, here, on this plane, the Akashic record, captures
the exact
feelings and intent that accompany the behavior action as it
occurs. Thus
setting up the karmic legacy of each moment ... in each moment.
How much more meaningful the old adage becomes: "We can lie to
each other but
we CANNOT lie to ourselves." Especially in these days.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 17:32:30 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA01502 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 17:22:36 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990211100100.008442a0@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:01:00 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World No Need to Renounce Nirvana
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi all,
Jerry wrote:
>>>From what I understand of most Tibetan Lamas they renounce Nirvana in
>advance and deliberately accumulate karma to avoid it....this would
>indicate that if they were to achieve liberation upon death they would
>have no way to cause incarnation again...as karma would be zero in
>theory.<<
>
>There is no need to "renounce" anything nor to "deliberately accumulate
>karma." The desire to help others is sufficient to bring anyone back
>into a new life and it is this desire that separates the Mahayana from
>the Therevadin.
>
>Jerry S.
>
Jerry,
I agree with what you say - the idea that there is others is alone enough
to cause re-incarnation, I don't think it has to be just the desire to help
others. The Lamas know full well before hand that this incarnation won't
really achieve liberation, but they tell the laity that they are renouncing
Nirvana for their protective benefit. At least this is what Alexandra
David-Nell says in 'Initiates and Initiations in Tibet'. She seems to
beleive that the whole Tulku thing is very dicey indeed.
Regards,
darren
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 17:47:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA00940 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 17:20:56 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990211095831.008c8d40@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:58:31 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Just in addition to our discussions on the after death states - Last night
I saw the film 'What Dreams May Come' with Robin Williams and Annabella
Sciorra.
To summarise for those that haven't seen it (don't read on if you don't
want the film ruined) - Williams and Sciorra are married with 2 children.
One day the children are killed in a car accident - the Nanny was driving
after the kids had asked there Mum - so Sciorra is not only overcome with
grief, but thinks it's her fault for not driving that day. She has a
breakdown but Williams manages to get her out of it and they start to
rebuild - until he is also killed by a car.
We follow williams then through the after death states...
At first he is a disembodied spirit watching his funeral and then trying
to 'channel' his wife a communication. Then he is transported to his own
subjective heaven (devachan?) where anything is as he wills it. But he
doesn't want heaven he wants his love. At this point however his wife
decides to take her own life in despair. As a suicide she is confined to
her own subjective hell.
In the meantime Williams searches for his children in the 'common heaven'.
After making contact with both of them he enlists Max Von Sydows help in
passing Cerberus and entering Hell (which is sudden;y a 'common hell' and
not subjective) to retrieve his wife even though he is told this is
impossible.
Of course their love conquers all and they are bothe returned to Williams
subjective heaven along with their kids. But here's the twist, they decide
to reincarnate.
I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in an effort
to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so many
issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story. For
Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the children
etc from previous incarnations? What about the differential in bodies
available to spirits wanting incarnation? I could go on...but you get the
picture.
Anybody else seen the film and have a comment?
Darren
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 19:02:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA13632 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 18:54:23 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Drpsionic@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 19:25:27 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 58
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 99-02-10 18:46:53 EST, you write:
<< I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in an effort
to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so many
issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story. For
Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the children
etc from previous incarnations? >>
Just how many hours do you think this thing would run if they did that?
It's a movie for satan's sake!
Chuck
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 19:10:42 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id SAA12104 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 18:42:35 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990211112106.008f6620@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:21:06 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World This was forwarded to me...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi all ,
Below is an email I recieved from a friend on the NOVELTY list I have
talked about before. Many of the people on the NOVELTY list study both HPB
and Crowley, although we are mostly pretty young and hence our learning
tries to fit it in with our own drug experiences.
Can anyone tell me the whole story (sans verbosity) of what is referred to
below?
namaste
Darren
(aka NOS, world leader pretend)
>
>Care Darren,
>
>Sorry I never got a chance to join the Theosophy forum of which you
>are a member.
>
>As long as there is time, there is always the possibility of change.:)
>
>I had a question for you about your handle "NOS".
>
>I would have guessed it was an acronym for "Novum Ordum Seculorum".
>
>However, in connection with some threads on another forum to which I
>belong, it occurred to me that it might refer to the important
>distinction between "vos" and "nos" in novelness.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>Below pls find some novel thoughts of my own on the subject. It is
>excerpted from a post a sent to our forum, which you might have missed.
>
>Yours in the light,
>Dana
>
>[...
>> When you say that some one asked for an answer and your "psi"
>> responded. This is the sense in which I use the term spirit as in:
>>
>> "I am always with you in spirit, so long as you can afford the
>> licensing fee on my passive-consent."
>>
>> Yesterday, I had to send a notarized letter yesterday.
>>
>> Notaries make me laugh because for $5.00 a stranger will witness you
>to
>> god and country(speaking of the licensing fee of passive consent...).
>>
>> Even though, I called ahead with my particulars, there was some sort
>> of brouhaha in the notaries office
>> (Apparently, US passports are not an appropriate form of
>> identification for a notary because they contain no address.).
>>
>> Finally, I managed to make an appropriate impression, and my letter
>> was imprinted.
>>
>> Negatively, I discovered outside that the evil-bitch of a clark had
>> stamped my doc upside down.
>>
>> The only reason this little yarn is relevant to synchronicity theory
>> at all is in how it reflects upon a conversation which I had at a TS
>> mtg on Friday night.
>>
>> In the years following the death of HPB, a great legal controversy
>> pulled the TS apart and nearly brought it to an end.
>>
>> The whole controversy began when a sealed letter(the seal was made of
>> wax-smoke) was presented to vice-president Judge.
>>
>> Judge was asked to confirm that the seal was his own.
>>
>> Judge is reported to have, with his finger, blotted the mark beyond
>> recognition.
>>
>> The reason this is of particular interest to my story is because of
>> the very special nature of this seal.
>>
>> Do to the flambouant nature of the seals character, it appeared when
>> viewed from one perspective to read "Me" and from the opposite
>> perspective to read "We".
>>
>> The reason that Judge's act became such a great controversy within the
>> society is that the use of "M" seal, the upside-down position, by the
>> vice-president, may have implied the "passive consent" of the
>> President of the society Col. Olcott.
>>
>> President Olcott considered the destruction of the mark by
>> Vice-President Judge at least a sl(e)ight to honor, and possibly a
>> criminal act.
>>
>> The controversy which followed is a matter of historical record both
>> the Judge-Olcott letters have been printed, and the original scripts
>> are stored in the Bodelean Inst.
>>
>> ...]
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 10 19:17:26 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA15474 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 19:13:26 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <36C22E0B.8928DC6B@withoutwalls.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 17:10:38 -0800
From: Mark Kusek
Organization: Without Walls: An Internet Art Space
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.03 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
References: <3.0.2.32.19990211095831.008c8d40@ozemail.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Darren wrote:
<< I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in an
effort
to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so many
issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story. For
Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the
children
etc from previous incarnations? What about the differential in bodies
available to spirits wanting incarnation? I could go on...but you get
the
picture.
Anybody else seen the film and have a comment? >>
Yes, I saw it too. It made me think of all kinds of questions as well,
like ....
1) Could the "subjective heaven" Williams experienced really be
Devachan, especially with all the rampant emotionalism going on? Felt
more like a slightly higher than average Kama Loka (or a very low level
Devachan) to me. I mean, Williams was surely "suffering" to be separated
from his wife. That kind of emotional burn off is supposed to happen
prior to any "devachan", no? Reminded me of "Merton Fowler Land" from
"Dweller on Two Planets" by Phylos the Thibetan.
2) At first he doesn't "recognize" his two departed children, but sees
them in the guise of other people he apparently trusts or is comfortable
"seeing" more. Yet his "children" both act as his knowing guides,
explaining to him the "rules" of how Heaven and Hell work, what's going
on, etc., and basically serving as the dispensers of all the answers he
is seeking. How and when after they died, did they become so wise and
when would that experience of wisdom happen or have happened to him? It
seemed like they knew all about it and the film didn't explain how they
came upon that. Certainly his own afterlife experience eventually taught
him a few things, but not in any way near as complete an understanding
as his children showed. They seemed to understand more. How'd that
happen?
3) t was all still very personal and experiential for him. Definitely in
the realm of the personal ego. No change of consciousness to a mind that
transcends the last earthly life. No memory of other incarnations, no
broadstroke understanding, no past life review, no freedom from the
dross of personal anguish, etc., etc., etc.
Mark
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 04:13:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id EAA05961 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 04:11:47 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:11:02 -0000
Message-ID: <000101be55a6$d400b1e0$895895c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <36BFD985.39222BAC@lainet.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Martin,
Thanks for your question. I do hope you are going to answer it yourself:-)
You wrote:
> If I see a human baby, a puppy, a little plant,
> etc falling in a lake at the same time, even
> though I know that the Monad is in all of them
> I would save the baby first.
> Because of ... I don't have to explain it.
Actually, I think you do need to explain it. For I don't think your answer
is quite so obvious once we look at the wider picture. I would say that how
we respond to the world at large is more complex than your very straight
forward example allows.
In your example you left out the mineral kingdom. What if a baby, a puppy,
a flower, and a box of priceless rare jewels fell into the lake... would all
of us automatically save the baby? A silly question? Your answer makes the
assumption that in the order of things we automatically prize human life
over the animal, vegetable and mineral kingdoms. Yet we only have to look
at events in the world to recognise that often the reverse is the case.
Wealth in the form of minerals, ores, precious metals, etc are often given
more value than human life. We have a history of killing people by the
thousands in order to possess land and 'mineral' wealth. A nation may
intervene when a country is invaded because it is rich in oil, while at the
same time do nothing in countries where even greater atrocities are taking
place because there is no precious ' .... ' present.
Some people treat their pets better than the people around them. A cruel
person may 'love' his pet animals and yet have no hesitation in making
people suffer, in some cases murdering them. To modify your example:
would a cruel person / criminal save his race horse, a haul of cannabis, a
casket of gold or your child?
Even thoughts, feelings and sensations (which we might relate to the
elemental kingdoms prior to mineral stage of evolution) may be given more
importance than human life. How many people have been murdered or made to
suffer in the name of an 'ideology' of one kind or another? How many people
have been murdered or been made to suffer because of our rage, anger,
jealousy & so on.. or because our feelings have been hurt? How many people
have been left to suffer because it was more important to satisfy our desire
for particular sensations of comfort, stimulation, addiction.
To bring in those kingdoms of nature 'above' the human stage we could also
add that many more people have been murdered, tortured, made to suffer in
the name of " God" or "the Gods".
But let's take an example where the people involved are ordinary, everyday,
'good people' by the standards of modern society, and let's assume that you
and I fit into that category. What if two children fell into the lake, one
was my child and the other was yours. Which one would you save? And
supposing that a sage had told you that your child was destined to die in
the lake and that my child was destined to become a great leader for the
good of the many. Would you be able to put aside the love of your own child
and save my child instead?
Theosophy would say that our response to all those scenarios would depend on
our moral and spiritual development. Further, only a being endowed with
Mind (Manas) can make a moral decision as to which course of action to take.
For it is Manas which endows us with the capacity to choose and exercise
'free will'. The 'lower' kingdoms of nature have yet to achieve it.
At present our consciousness is largely self centred, or to put it
theosophically, centred in Kama-Manas. This causes us to use exploit the
kingdoms of nature mainly for our own benefit, to the detriment of those
'kingdoms' and of our fellows, which in the long run includes us.
As I understand it, it is through Manas that we learn to make moral choices,
to choose to become 'SELF-Centred' as opposed to 'self-centred'. The more
that Manas aligns itself with Atma-Buddhi and undertakes the study and
training involved to comprehend the Occult Doctrines then the more likely
those moral choices will be based on genuine spiritual perception and a
direct understanding of Universal Law.
Most of us are a long way off from the kind wisdom and spiritual perception
required that would allow us to know 'who' and 'what' to save at any given
time. The seer who perceived that it was the Karma of a drowning man to die
may well let him die and save that which s/he believed would give the most
benefit to the world at large.
I don't have that kind of wisdom so in the meantime I 'try' and do the best
I can. I would want to save the drowning person over and above the animal,
the plant and mineral. But I also have to admit that I put the needs of my
family and loved ones above the needs of other people. So in your example I
would 'automatically' want to save my own child rather than another's - even
if I 'knew' that the other child may have more to offer humanity as a whole.
In terms of responding to the other kingdoms of nature as a whole...
Perhaps when we really have a sense that...
"the root of every atom individually and of every form collectively, is that
seventh principle or the one Reality.." (SD)
...we may then begin to appreciate that the life (monadic) behind all forms
is evolving and has a right to it's own destiny. So, we may not jump into
the lake and save the puppy or flower instead of the baby but we may become
motivated enough to learn how to assist rather than selfishly use and abuse
the lower kingdoms of nature.
Best wishes,
Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of Martin
> Leiderman
> Sent: 09 February 1999 06:46
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
>
>
>
>
> Peter Merriott wrote:
>
> >
> > Thus Theosophy teaches that brotherhood encompasses all
> kingdoms of nature
> > for all are evolving and all will go through the stage of
> humanity (where
> > spirit and matter are in equilibrium). The Monadic essence
> travels through
> > all these stages...
>
> Now, Peter, even though I agree with you on the above statement,
> I have problem
> applying it in the following situation:
>
> If I see a human baby, a puppy, a little plant, etc falling in a
> lake at the
> same time, even though I know that the Monad is in all of them I
> would save the
> baby first.
> Because of ... I don't have to explain it.
> After saving the baby, I may try to save the puppy, and so on.
> I don't think that the above Theosophical statement implies that
> rescuing the
> plan, animal, baby has the same moral value.
>
> How do you apply the idea of: " brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms of
> nature"
>
>
> This question is not only for Peter, but to anyone who sincerely
> is trying to
> live theosophical principles and not only talking about them.
>
>
> Martin Leiderman
>
>
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 04:19:04 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id EAA05945 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 04:11:41 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy?
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:10:55 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be55a6$cfbf37a0$895895c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <000201be53d0$26a800c0$990e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas,
> I think you have given an excellent series of observations.
> Christianity - that of Jesus - is not perverted, but that which
> the Churches have done with it, is at the root of all its present
> faults. Did you ever read HPB's: THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS
Thanks, and I take your point about Churchianity. It was the latter I was
refering to. Yes I have read the above some time ago now. But I will take
your tip and re-visit it.
Dallas, I got a *copy* of your post but I don't think it made it to the
list, or if it did I didn't see it. I often have the sense that people are
replying to mails that I've not seen posted. However, since it contains
many valuable thoughts and questions that might be of interest to others, I
have reposted it in below.
Best wishes
Peter
________________
Feb 8th 1999
Dear Peter:
I'll comment on this by making some insertions below. I think
you have given an excellent series of observations.
Christianity - that of Jesus - is not perverted, but that which
the Churches have done with it, is at the root of all its present
faults. We ought to go "back to Jesus" and "forward to "applying
what Jesus taught." Otherwise, non of us deserves the
designation "Christians."
Did you ever read HPB's: THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS
?" Available "ON Line" through "BLAVATSKY.NET" It's well worth
a read as she goes into the esoteric base of Christianity.
Dal
>Hi Jerry and Dallas,
>>If I understood Dallas correctly, he is saying that Theosophy
*explains* the basis of brotherhood and it's importance, rather
than just *says* brotherhood and love is important. Below are
just a few thoughts that immediately come to mind.
DALLAS; Not quite, as "Brotherhood" and "Love," being the result
of UNITY in the One Spiritual Source for all of us, the logic or
reason which our embodied brain-minds (which are 'reflections' of
the eternal Egoic Mind-Principle) requires in order to assure
itself that it is dealing with a fact, a law, or a truth.
>>Theosophy states that our ultimate essence is ONE and is that
which is 'uncreate'. "the root of every atom individually and of
every form collectively, is that seventh principle or the one
Reality.." (SD)
DALLAS: That is correct as I've understood and followed the
logic.
>>However, Christianity teaches that we are *created* in the
likeness of God. There is already an inherent duality in this
idea. The mystic who states "verily I and thou art That" is
blasphemous according to Christianity.
DALLAS: That is what the CHURCHES teach, and not what Christ
taught.
"I (the EMBODIED SELF/MIND) and my Father (THE HIGHER SELF) are
ONE." Also He addressed the multitude saying "KNOW YE NOT THAT
YE ARE GODS ?"
>>In Christianity, brotherhood applies only to human beings. The
other kingdoms of nature are here solely for the benefit of
humans.
DALLAS: Again, that is Churchianity.
>>In Theosophy, Universal Brotherhood applies to all the kingdoms
of nature and extends throughout all the planes of consciousness
and Being. "..for every atom in the Universe has the potentiality
of self-consciousness in it, and is, like the Monads of Leibnitz,
a Universe in itself, and for itself. It is an atom and an
angel." SD Vol 1 p 107
Thus Theosophy teaches that brotherhood encompasses all kingdoms
of nature for all are evolving and all will go through the stage
of humanity (where spirit and matter are in equilibrium). The
Monadic essence travels through all these stages...
"...ascending through all the degrees of intelligence, from the
lowest to
the highest Manas, from mineral and plant, up to the holiest
archangel
(Dhyani-Buddha)." SD I Proem p17.
Hence duty is that which is due to all that lives based on the
above principle of One-ness and evolutionary Law.
DALLAS: Again, this is correct, and HPB says this again and
again in many places, in her articles, in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY,
and also the VOICE OF THE SILENCE. It is the idea of
universality, of continuity, of the immortality of the Monadic
Pilgrim that is so important. We either live in a Universe and
World that is run by fir and just laws or we do not.
>>In contrast to this eternal pilgrimage of the soul,
DALLAS: I suggest modifying this to read: "In contrast to the
pilgrimage of the eternal soul" -- of course the way you
expressed it is not wrong either, as the pilgrimage for an
immortal Being is also eternal. Time is not relevant, but
progress is.
In an infinite Universe, eternity implies to an immortal, that
"it" is always mid-way between the imperceptible and unprovable
"beginning" and the ever-unreachable, and indefinable "end."
And that is a mental construction, condition, and situation,
which may not appeal to many minds who like startings and
stoppings, and more tangible results. In the BHAGAVAD GITA
Krishna teaches Arjuna to perform DUTY, but to detach himself
mentally from any "HOPED-FOR RESULTS." A most difficult thing to
describe or to visualize in our world of all too many limits. In
other words, to separate the mind faculty, from that passionate
grabbing nature in us, which depends for its personal
satisfaction on its desires and acquisitions. "If I can't get it
or hold it in subjection, it does not exist for me!" And that is
the essential difference between the desire to possess, and the
friendship of sharing.
>>Christianity teaches that for every new born human infant, God
creates a new soul, even if that infant never makes it out of the
womb. Whether the soul is born into a life of 'rags' or 'riches'
is a matter of God's will rather than a result of individual
effort.
DALLAS: And how is the difference between a "soul" and a "mind"
defined ?
If Man has a "Soul" what is it, and what is its value ? And if
he is ill trained, then why entrust him with anything valuable
which he is incapable of understanding or using ? Paradoxes.
These ought to be explained. No.. No mysteries are of any use,
and no area of search ought to be forbidden. Why should the
Church be afraid of the "free-mind" of its parishioners ? Why
does it encourage "belief" and "credulity ?" Has it ever been
able to prove any of its claims ? Miraculous cures are done in
all parts of the world outside the area of Church control - in
other words "miracles" are not reserved to the priests of any
creed modern or ancient, as history and literature reveal.
DALLAS: And that is supposed to be a "good God ?" I would call
it tyranny. Whim, Lawlessness, and the root of all vicious
thoughts and acts. To attribute to the MOST HIGH the lowest
possible image of the selfish and isolated personality, one which
sets itself up against the rest of the World, its "friends,"
family" and all that is most to be cherished. And the wonder of
it all is that most people do not realize what a horrible
inversion of the prerogatives of the "all-seeing, benevolent
Father-DEITY" this is.
If ever there was a devil devised by the cunning of Man ( a kind
of wolf in sheep's clothing) this is one of the lowest possible
examples. And in every case it is priesthood (of whatever
religion) that has devised this in order to subjugate the
thoughtless, lazy and the unwary to their will.
>From an educative position (which all wise persons ought to
adopt) their position (as priests and guardians for their
"flock") has become domineering, self-serving and intolerant of
any impartial fairness.
Consider for a moment (if at all possible)that a whimsical God
does in fact "create" the World and all that is in it. He (or
She) then places it in the hands of an ill-trained, thoughtless,
opinionated selfish group named "Priesthood," and for the moment
to be considered the best that "humanity" offers as examples of
honesty, and fairness. (Not but some really are so.)
What kind of insanity is that ? Is that a sample of God-like
ability ? Consider that the laws of the Land (at least in most
countries at this time, are administered by a non-denominational
group) are far more impartial and just than that. And now
consider that a special and important trust - the shepherding of
many lives - is given to a group of individuals who actively
devise ways to support such a caricature of REALITY ? One feels
inclined to ask if we live in a World of madmen and people whose
perception of fairness is always in conflict with the desire to
preserve a personal ease of life that is in conflict with the
rights and lives of others like them. Further, no one person is
able to prolong his own life for more than a rather short span.
So, to what end is selfishness and the unfairness ?
Now let us set to work and reverse this, and ask what would be
the highest, most just, most noble and altruistic, charitable and
cherishing opposite - something that can be relied upon to be
just, fair, impartial, always sensitive and true - so that all
beings are treated alike with fairness and assisted in developing
the best qualities desirable.
>>According to Christianity suffering is the will of God and it's
origin is a mystery to us for GOD's will cannot be known.
Theosophy teaches that each of us creates our own Karma. We
alone are responsible for the suffering we create for ourselves
and for others. Our Karma is inextricably linked with that of
all beings. Theosophy states, lift a little of your own Karma
and you lift a little of the whole world's.
Theosophy teaches that Universal Brotherhood is a fact in nature
rather than an inherent human quality or a virtue to be
cultivated.
DALLAS: And that ought to end any argument. But if adopted as
a basis it will change many lives and ways of living. What a
wonderful world would it not introduce ?
Thanks and best wishes, Dal. (Feb 8th)
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 08:28:31 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA14321 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:24:14 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:19:08 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Hollywood After Death Story
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>Anybody else seen the film and have a comment?
>
>Darren
Its probably the closest that Hollywood has come yet to
a realistic after-death story.
Jerry S
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 08:37:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA13908 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:20:44 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:15:12 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Tulku
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>>At least this is what Alexandra David-Nell says in 'Initiates and
Initiations in Tibet'. She seems to beleive that the whole Tulku thing
is very dicey indeed.<<
Darren, David-Neel has probably the best explanation of tulku ever
written. Basically it is the re-incarnation of an esoteric ray that
expresses itself as a wisdom-body of teachings into a qualified neonate,
rather than the re-incarnation of a "person" or atman (which the
Buddhists don't believe in anyway). The idea that a tulku is a
reincarnated Adept is close, but not quite right.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 11:40:55 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA31895 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:03:59 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990211095831.008c8d40@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:02:11 -0800
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: Rodolfo Don
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>Just in addition to our discussions on the after death states - Last night
>I saw the film 'What Dreams May Come' with Robin Williams and Annabella
>Sciorra.
>
...................
>
>I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in an effort
>to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so many
>issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story. For
>Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the children
>etc from previous incarnations? What about the differential in bodies
>available to spirits wanting incarnation? I could go on...but you get the
>picture.
>
>Anybody else seen the film and have a comment?
>
>Darren
>
>
I saw the film when it first came out and I loved it. Of course .... the
story is a big 'paella' of different belief systems. That's ok with me.
The movie most always represent a belief system, even if it shows
reincarnation the same way we believe to be true. I found the movie very
beautiful particularly the scenes with R. Williams flying through the
painting, that looked like a Van Gogh.
I have recommended the movie to at least a couple of my friends and always
on the basis of beauty. It is like "eye candy".
Rudy
>
>
>
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 12:14:39 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA06917 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:00:29 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World This was forwarded to me...
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:00:09 -0800
Message-ID: <000001be55f0$bf42f160$340e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990211112106.008f6620@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 10th
Dallas says:
To be able to secure an answer to this question of "seal" and
Judge blurring it, I would like to know where this story
originates ? Is there a source that I can go and refer to ?
Book, Letter, Magazine article, if so where exactly ?
Do you, or does someone have an exact record of the Bodelean
Library documents that I might be able to see = or a reproduction
?
Thanks
Dallas
=========================================
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of D.
Porter
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 1999 5:21 PM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World This was forwarded to me...
Hi all ,
Below is an email I received from a friend on the NOVELTY list I
have
talked about before. Many of the people on the NOVELTY list study
both HPB
and Crowley, although we are mostly pretty young and hence our
learning
tries to fit it in with our own drug experiences.
Can anyone tell me the whole story (sans verbosity) of what is
referred to
below?
namaste
Darren
(aka NOS, world leader pretend)
>
>Care Darren,
>
>Sorry I never got a chance to join the Theosophy forum of which
you
>are a member.
>
>As long as there is time, there is always the possibility of
change.:)
>
>I had a question for you about your handle "NOS".
>
>I would have guessed it was an acronym for "Novum Ordum
Seculorum".
>
>However, in connection with some threads on another forum to
which I
>belong, it occurred to me that it might refer to the important
>distinction between "vos" and "nos" in novelness.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>Below pls find some novel thoughts of my own on the subject. It
is
>excerpted from a post a sent to our forum, which you might have
missed.
>
>Yours in the light,
>Dana
>
>[...
>> When you say that some one asked for an answer and your "psi"
>> responded. This is the sense in which I use the term spirit
as in:
>>
>> "I am always with you in spirit, so long as you can afford the
>> licensing fee on my passive-consent."
>>
>> Yesterday, I had to send a notarized letter yesterday.
>>
>> Notaries make me laugh because for $5.00 a stranger will
witness you
>to
>> god and country(speaking of the licensing fee of passive
consent...).
>>
>> Even though, I called ahead with my particulars, there was
some sort
>> of brouhaha in the notaries office
>> (Apparently, US passports are not an appropriate form of
>> identification for a notary because they contain no address.).
>>
>> Finally, I managed to make an appropriate impression, and my
letter
>> was imprinted.
>>
>> Negatively, I discovered outside that the evil-bitch of a
clark had
>> stamped my doc upside down.
>>
>> The only reason this little yarn is relevant to synchronicity
theory
>> at all is in how it reflects upon a conversation which I had
at a TS
>> mtg on Friday night.
>>
>> In the years following the death of HPB, a great legal
controversy
>> pulled the TS apart and nearly brought it to an end.
>>
>> The whole controversy began when a sealed letter(the seal was
made of
>> wax-smoke) was presented to vice-president Judge.
>>
>> Judge was asked to confirm that the seal was his own.
>>
>> Judge is reported to have, with his finger, blotted the mark
beyond
>> recognition.
>>
>> The reason this is of particular interest to my story is
because of
>> the very special nature of this seal.
>>
>> Do to the flambouant nature of the seals character, it
appeared when
>> viewed from one perspective to read "Me" and from the opposite
>> perspective to read "We".
>>
>> The reason that Judge's act became such a great controversy
within the
>> society is that the use of "M" seal, the upside-down position,
by the
>> vice-president, may have implied the "passive consent" of the
>> President of the society Col. Olcott.
>>
>> President Olcott considered the destruction of the mark by
>> Vice-President Judge at least a sl(e)ight to honor, and
possibly a
>> criminal act.
>>
>> The controversy which followed is a matter of historical
record both
>> the Judge-Olcott letters have been printed, and the original
scripts
>> are stored in the Bodelean Inst.
>>
>> ...]
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 12:58:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA13087 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:51:57 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: Theos-World RE: :What Dreams may come" -- Death in Hollywood
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 11:51:42 -0800
Message-ID: <000601be55f7$f35e9e20$340e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 11 1999
Dear Darren and Rodolfo:
Val and I saw the movie some weeks ago, and while not strictly
according to the Theosophical view of the after death states and
what it was possible to do or view as an experience in them, it
could serve as an introduction to the ideas of the after death
conditions as a sequel to the life last lived. The closing scene
of the two reincarnating as children - while not always true, has
an element in it demonstrating how Karma can bring fellow
Soul-Egos back together again.
If Reincarnation is the doctrine of hope, Karma is the doctrine
of the great Law of nature that demands it.
I have also recommended it.
Best wishes as always,
Dallas TenBroeck
===============================
-----Original Message-----
From: Rodolfo Don
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 1999 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
>Just in addition to our discussions on the after death states -
Last night
>I saw the film 'What Dreams May Come' with Robin Williams and
Annabella
>Sciorra.
>I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in
an effort
>to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so
many
>issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story.
For
>Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the
children
>etc from previous incarnations? What about the differential in
bodies
>available to spirits wanting incarnation? I could go on...but
you get the
>picture.
>
>Anybody else seen the film and have a comment?
>
>Darren
>
>***************************************
I saw the film when it first came out and I loved it. Of course
.... the
story is a big 'paella' of different belief systems. That's ok
with me.
The movie most always represent a belief system, even if it shows
reincarnation the same way we believe to be true. I found the
movie very
beautiful particularly the scenes with R. Williams flying through
the
painting, that looked like a Van Gogh.
I have recommended the movie to at least a couple of my friends
and always
on the basis of beauty. It is like "eye candy".
Rudy
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 11 13:43:22 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id NAA19559 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 11 Feb 1999 13:42:50 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Tulku
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:42:36 -0800
Message-ID: <000801be55ff$0e762dc0$340e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 11th 1999
Perhaps one of the first examples of this transfer of
consciousness between an Adept and an Infant is narrated by HPB
in ISIS UNVEILED, Vol. I pp 436-8. Some more information is
given by her in ISIS II 598-602.
Dallas
****************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of
Gerald Schueler
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 1999 6:15 AM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Tulku
>>At least this is what Alexandra David-Nell says in 'Initiates
and
Initiations in Tibet'. She seems to beleive that the whole Tulku
thing
is very dicey indeed.<<
Darren, David-Neel has probably the best explanation of tulku
ever
written. Basically it is the re-incarnation of an esoteric ray
that
expresses itself as a wisdom-body of teachings into a qualified
neonate,
rather than the re-incarnation of a "person" or atman (which the
Buddhists don't believe in anyway). The idea that a tulku is a
reincarnated Adept is close, but not quite right.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 12 00:26:33 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id AAA19280 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 00:10:09 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990212164844.008bfc60@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:48:44 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi to all,
Yes chuckybabe I know.
And please feel free to discuss this thread while I am gone. I will be back
in 4 days, and will answer those posts addressed to me then. Sorry for the
delays.
Namaste all
Darren
At 07:25 PM 2/10/99 EST, you wrote:
>In a message dated 99-02-10 18:46:53 EST, you write:
>
><< I think this film is definitely mixing up it's belief systems in an effort
> to make Christians and "new agers' happy. It fails to address so many
> issues that in the end it becomes another hollywood love story. For
> Example, is this their first incarnation - if not what about the children
> etc from previous incarnations? >>
>
>
>Just how many hours do you think this thing would run if they did that?
>
>It's a movie for satan's sake!
>
>Chuck
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 12 01:26:33 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id BAA22477 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 01:01:24 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Drpsionic@aol.com
Message-ID: <84cd8c6a.36c3d0fe@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 01:58:06 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 58
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 99-02-12 01:26:19 EST, you write:
<< Yes chuckybabe I know. >>
I'm glad you do.
There is just something that strikes me as really strange when people get the
idea in their heads that a hollywood film should explain not only a spiritual
idea, but THEIR spiritual idea to the exclusion of all others.
I mean, my idea of a fun movie about the post-death experience would be to
have Robin Williams encounter a Lovecraftian character who imprisons his
astral form in a bottle and torments him with visions of the Elder Gods until
he goes out and does the experimenter's bidding. Who knows, maybe
Nyarlathotep might even be persuaded to make a guest appearance.
Chuck
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 12 12:58:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA17292 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 12:56:50 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy? == Relations to Jesus' teachings.
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:56:34 -0800
Message-ID: <001901be56c1$cba7c800$b00e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <000001be55a6$cfbf37a0$895895c1@et.u-net.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb. 12th 1999 I came across this extract which might be of
some help. Dallas.
Some views of Mr. Judge may help show how close the practical
aspects of Jesus' teachings and Theosophical ethics agree:
In Chapter 4 of St. Mathew an account of Jesus being led into the
wilderness to be "tempted" by the "devil" is mentioned:
"theosophically, the trials of the disciple in the world or
wilderness of his own nature" is meant.
"The tempter suggests first that bread be made out of stones
after the long fast. But Jesus replied: "It is written. Man
shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth
out of the mouth of God."
After a period of prayer, or aspiration, the mystics in all ages
had first to resist the temptation to at once satisfy immediate
bodily wants and then on triumphing they receive instruction and
benefit from "God" who is the Higher Self. The Higher Self is
the god they all, including Jesus, aspired to and spoke of as God
and Father. Usually the clash and roar of the lower nature
prevents the words or "voice" of that Father from being heard.
Shakespeare knew the value of fasting to release the inner for he
said that when the bodily encasement was reduced the inner self
came forth more easily. And here Jesus is only repeating what
all the schools of real occultism teach, that is, that the real
man has his own appropriate food, or the communion with the Monad
which is not perfectly conscious on this plane, but must be
sought for in its own proper habitation.
The "devil" took him to a high place suggesting that he throw
himself down and be saved by angels, to which Jesus replied:
"Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."
This could not mean that he adjured Satan not to tempt him-his
God-but rather that it was neither common sense nor the act of an
occultist to show his powers for no end but vanity. This is one
of the rules of the Lodge, that if you have occult power you
shall not use it except for the benefit of others.
The Sermon on the Mount is of high importance theosophically. If
taken literally, it is a string of meaningless promises which are
broken every day, but adding Karma and Reincarnation they are the
old declarations of all great teachers and holy books prior to
the alleged time of Jesus.
The first beatitude, that the poor in spirit will have heaven is
that which was always taught as the result of humility. For only
when the personal self is thoroughly eliminated, and the idea of
separateness is destroyed by that of universal brotherhood, does
the illumination from within desired by all earnest students come
to one. Many neglect this injunction being carried away by
scientific phases or having personal ends. One need not be a
"Christian" to see and accept this injunction of Jesus since it
was only repeated as of old by him; carried on, as Confucius did
his ideas.
{Copied from archives of the T. S. from notes in Mr. Judge's
handwriting.)
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 12 19:28:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA24552 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 12 Feb 1999 19:14:23 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Death in Hollywood
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:14:09 -0800
Message-ID: <000a01be56f6$8a130b40$200e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <84cd8c6a.36c3d0fe@aol.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 12th
Dear Chuck: People are stimulated to think and imagine by all
kinds of things, movies, a word, a concept a note from a song,
etc... but do those stimulants lead to anything that can be built
into the imperishable memories of our lives ? Something that
will survive the death of the personality? Where do we find
anything hat is coherent ? And if so, how do we prove it is
valuable ? That is if such effort is thought to be necessary ?
Dallas
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sat Feb 13 03:28:23 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA23333 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sat, 13 Feb 1999 03:22:13 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theos Talk" ,
"Theosophy Study List"
Subject: Theos-World RE: A new Theosophical Study group - internactive - on THE SECRET DOCTRINE
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 02:21:28 -0800
Message-ID: <000101be573a$9ee9e180$950e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 13th 1999
Dear friends
If you wish to sample something truly interesting,
theosophically, go to:
http://www.blavatsky net.
And subscribe as a member to their discussion group on the Secret
Doctrine.
Watch for a while the interplay of contributions and questions.
I think you will find it interesting and refreshing.
Dal
****************************************
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 14 11:58:45 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA08271 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 11:51:23 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/
Message-ID: <36C70D68.818B8020@azstarnet.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 10:52:42 -0700
From: Caldwell/Graye
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com, Daniel Caldwell
Subject: Theos-World The Absolute & the 3 Logoi: A picture is worth a 1000 words
References: <000101be573a$9ee9e180$950e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
SUBJECT: The Absolute & the 3 Logoi: A picture is worth a 1000 words
(1) Can a student relate the concept of the Absolute & the 3 Logoi to
the circle,
the circle with the dot , the circle with the diameter, etc. which is
found in the
SD, I, 4-5? For HPB's words, see
http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdcircl2.htm
(2) Also see http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/circle7b.htm where the
artist has
integrated the different symbols together. Does the arrangement suggest
stages of
unfoldment or manifestation? Does one perceive "motion" in this
picture? Is this
picture illustrative of the Absolute and the 3 Logoi?
(3) See http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/marduk7b.htm illustrating the
battle of
Marduk and Tiamat. Can one relate Marduk and Tiamat to the Absolute and
the 3
Logoi? To what stage of "creation"?
(4) In the last illustration
http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/vishnu7b.htm we see
Vishnu reclining on Ananta and a lotus sprouts forth from Vishnu's
navel. Who is
seated within the lotus? Can you perceive a relation between this
picture of
"creation" and the concept of the Absolute and the 3 Logoi? Also do you
see the
circle, the circle with the dot , the circle with the diameter, etc. in
this
picture of Vishnu?
Some food for thought.
Daniel Caldwell
blafoun@azstarnet.com
Tucson, Arizona
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 03:46:05 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA22816 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:43:08 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990216202205.0093e380@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:22:05 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World Tulku
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 09:15 AM 2/11/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>>At least this is what Alexandra David-Nell says in 'Initiates and
>Initiations in Tibet'. She seems to beleive that the whole Tulku thing
>is very dicey indeed.<<
>
>Darren, David-Neel has probably the best explanation of tulku ever
>written. Basically it is the re-incarnation of an esoteric ray that
>expresses itself as a wisdom-body of teachings into a qualified neonate,
>rather than the re-incarnation of a "person" or atman (which the
>Buddhists don't believe in anyway). The idea that a tulku is a
>reincarnated Adept is close, but not quite right.
>
>Jerry S.
>
yes sorry I didn't make myself clear - when I said she thought it was dicey
- I meant she thought that an individuality re-incarnates was dicey, but
you have explained it nicely above.....
Darren
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 03:55:27 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA22882 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:44:48 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990216202345.009286c0@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:23:45 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World RE: We or Me / Judges Seal.
In-Reply-To: <000001be55f0$bf42f160$340e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
References: <3.0.2.32.19990211112106.008f6620@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas,
Thanks for responding. I have tried to find out further info but have had
no response from the original poster as yet.
Will Advise
darren
At 11:00 AM 2/11/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Feb 10th
>
>Dallas says:
>
>To be able to secure an answer to this question of "seal" and
>Judge blurring it, I would like to know where this story
>originates ? Is there a source that I can go and refer to ?
>Book, Letter, Magazine article, if so where exactly ?
>
>Do you, or does someone have an exact record of the Bodelean
>Library documents that I might be able to see = or a reproduction
>?
>
>Thanks
>
>Dallas
>
>=========================================
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
>[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of D.
>Porter
>Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 1999 5:21 PM
>To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>Subject: Theos-World This was forwarded to me...
>
>Hi all ,
>
>Below is an email I received from a friend on the NOVELTY list I
>have
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 04:01:03 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA22641 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:39:58 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990216201854.00923c20@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:18:54 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: :What Dreams may come" -- Death in
Hollywood
In-Reply-To: <000601be55f7$f35e9e20$340e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
References:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
More on Movies with a Message, here is a list of my favourites, anyone that
has seen any, please feel free to comment:
Trigger Happy (Few people 'get' this one)
Alas for Me (Probably to French Existentialist for most)
Don't Call me Omar (I was in an altered state, maybe that's required...
Fifth Element (Probably too Sci-Fi for many but a great yarn)
The Acid House (Three short stories , only first and third apply)
Wings of Desire (Remade in US as the shocking City of Angels)
Living in Oblivion (Low Budget bizarro but I loved it)
Roger Ebert
At 11:51 AM 2/11/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Feb 11 1999
>
>Dear Darren and Rodolfo:
>
>Val and I saw the movie some weeks ago, and while not strictly
>according to the Theosophical view of the after death states and
>what it was possible to do or view as an experience in them, it
>could serve as an introduction to the ideas of the after death
>conditions as a sequel to the life last lived. The closing scene
>of the two reincarnating as children - while not always true, has
>an element in it demonstrating how Karma can bring fellow
>Soul-Egos back together again.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 04:09:21 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA22803 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:42:47 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990216202145.0093ca80@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:21:45 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Re: Theos-World Hollywood After Death Story
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 09:19 AM 2/11/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>Anybody else seen the film and have a comment?
>>
>>Darren
>
>
>Its probably the closest that Hollywood has come yet to
>a realistic after-death story.
>
>Jerry S
Now I don't know how to take this......it could mean two things....
No...I'm going to assume you're being sarcastic....:)
Darren
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 04:13:10 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id DAA22895 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 03:44:56 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990216202352.008a1460@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:23:52 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World RE: One Soul or Many Souls/ One Dream or Many Dreams
In-Reply-To: <000101be549c$2bfa2e00$500e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
References: <3.0.2.32.19990209104514.007c47e0@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Dallas,
Sorry for the turnaround on the piece below...but i've been rather busy. I
think you nicely tie up most threads by ending in the theosophical
fundamentals, so i'll only address those that I personally have not resolved
Regards
Darren
*****************************************************************
>4. Akasa has a number of attributes. One has to look for them in
>the SD Index and assemble them. Chiefly, it is the eternal
>record of every Monad's experiences. It does not vary, nor does
>it disappear. It therefore is a record of history as well as of
>the adventures of every Monad. Our past is there for the Wise to
>review if necessary and for us to see when we have developed the
>wisdom and fortitude to stand such a perception. It is not used
>for curiosity "surfing," but stands as a fact available for those
>who may need it.
*** You say 'every monad' - but I thought there was only ONE monad. This
seems to be another area i am making a hash of.
>of man is essential to do this. The "dreamer" is always the ONE
>CONSCIOUSNESS that is our true self, the decision maker and the
>user of the Mind as of all other faculties. It is the pupil
>working in the school of Life from incarnation to incarnation and
>using all the many personalities. Our character and capacities
>are evidence of what we have learned and also indicate what
>remains for us to learn.
(we are the dreamers, the world-makers....)
>7. You seem to confuse the idea of the UNIVERSAL SOUL with our
>own Soul Identity. Our identity is our identity. The Soul is
>the MIND. It is your Monad which is using and working through
>the mental faculties. The Mind serves to link the creative
>SPIRITUAL powers and forces with the MATERIAL FORMS and
>LIMITATIONS. In great Nature or the UNIVERSE IN MANIFESTATION
>there is a corresponding link which consists of the united
>faculties of all Mind-beings.
Or the corollory - all mind-beings exist because of the ONE link, but do
they exist objectively? I personally reject objectivism.
>It is the universal cement that unites all living things and the
>source of LAW and justice and fairness. Some term it divine
>love. In another way we could call it the UNIVERSAL MONAD in
>which and from which all individual Monads have emerged. No this
>many be asking you to stretch your mind a good deal, but words
>are such limiting traps. It is the story of the "Eye" versus the
>"Heart" doctrine, always.
This makes me think of a film title i recently saw 'Love is the Devil'.
>8. Necessity is a good question. Why not simply say we are all
>here together. We are all asking why. And this kind of
>discussion brings out what we know and don't know. Some surmises
>are then checked out to see if they are valid or not in other
>minds. If you have the SD, check vol. 2, p. 176 top on Desire
>(Universal Desire) also something is written on that on II p.
>578-9 and 484 bottom. One thing is sure: we are not the
>playthings of some vast Power. And certainly not of a whimsical
>and cruel "Personal God." The fact that there are so many
>religions and beliefs, and there is no move to either unify them
>or erase them, ought to make it plain that they are constructed
>by men to subjugate others. Hence they befuddle the mind.
What I mean by 'necessity' is more like - Is there something we MUST be
doing or something that MUST be done. Is there some really important goal
or can we take our progress at a leisurely pace? Is there some horrible
punishment for failure? I don't mean on a personal level - I fully
understand that we are all our own judges in the after-death 'weighing of
the heart' and give ourselves our own subjective devachanic Heaven or Hell.
>11. The "Dreamspell" of the Mayas is an illustration of the
>present mind-desire linkage. It produces selfishness. When we
>see the alternative, we make the effort to break the "spell."
>Necessity is the pathway that leads on in our own evolution. We
>begin to "widen out to the Universal."
Just out of interest the Mayans beleive the Dreamspell will end for
collective humanity (this race) on December 22 2012. At least their
cyclical calendar ends on this date - and it's start date was interestingly
enough the day Adonis D ploughed into Atlantis sinking it beneath the waves.
>14. A STRANGE STORY is a marvelous example .......g. As to Jung's
"making contact with the
>animus" - it has two meanings apparently: 1.) animating or
>actuating spirit, and 2.) a feeling or spirit of hostility or
>hatred and animosity. The first seems neutral enough, as our
>motive lend it coloring, morally. The second in on the "Dark
>Side" as I suggested. But that needs to be defined, each for
>himself. Jung devised special words to serve as short-cuts in
>conveying ideas. Theosophy does the same, but it also simplifies
>and tries to make relations clear when conveying concepts. Why
>need the "dark side" be encouraged? Who created it? If we can
>determine that we will know what to do.
I don't think 'anyone' created a dark side. it just is. And by contacting
ones inner darkside I don't mean encouraging it - more like a facing all of
ones deepest fears...
>15. Bardo needs adjustment with the Theosophical concepts. KEY
>TO THEOSOPHY on after-death states ought to be used.
Look I have a problem with that personally as I've stated before. The KEY
seems to be very simplistic (almost like What Dreams May Come???). The
Bardo is in fact very scientific. When one actually experiences Wave
Vibration reality or the elements 'collapsing or withdrawing' into one
another the Bardo's meanings become lucid. To me devachan is just one small
part of the Bardo's - as I've said before the 'Hallucinatory Theatre'. (is
SOMA mortomimetic? can we recreate the death process for ourselves, a sort
of trial run? )
>Best wishes to you, Dal
And to you as always,
Darren
"devil inside, devil inside, every single one of us...the devil inside" - INXS
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 16 21:04:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA25320 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 20:58:49 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: One Soul or Many Souls/ One Dream or Many Dreams
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 19:58:13 -0800
Message-ID: <001001be5a29$bd6f4ea0$230e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990216202352.008a1460@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 16th
Dear Darren:
Thanks for your comments. Some more notes are below. I am
trying to see if some of the Theosophical concepts are helpful in
looking at our views.
Best wishes as always,
Dallas
====================================================
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of D.
Porter
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 2:24 AM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World RE: One Soul or Many Souls/ One Dream or
Many Dreams
Dear Dallas,
Sorry for the turnaround on the piece below...but i've been
rather busy. I
think you nicely tie up most threads by ending in the
theosophical
fundamentals, so i'll only address those that I personally have
not resolved
Regards
Darren
=================================================
DALLAS DON'T FEEL PRESSURE, PLEASE. Dal
*****************************************************************
>4. Akasa has a number of attributes. One has to look for them
in
>the SD Index and assemble them. Chiefly, it is the eternal
>record of every Monad's experiences. It does not vary, nor does
>it disappear. It therefore is a record of history as well as of
>the adventures of every Monad. Our past is there for the Wise
to
>review if necessary and for us to see when we have developed the
>wisdom and fortitude to stand such a perception. It is not used
>for curiosity "surfing," but stands as a fact available for
those
>who may need it.
*** You say 'every monad' - but I thought there was only ONE
monad. This
seems to be another area i am making a hash of.
DALLAS.
I find that the word MONAD has been used in various ways.
Sometimes it means more than one component working in harmony
with others.
THE ONE MONAD metaphysically would include everything.
However, once that the Universe emanates from the ABSOLUTENESS
which is absolutely undefinable in any terms we know, the first
idea of manifestaion or solidification which is sometimes called
the FIRST CAUSE, or the CREATIVE CAUSE, or THE FIRST LOGOS, or
ADI-BUDDHA, or BRAHM, etc., one finds duality supervenes.
Then the contrast of SPIRIT (or ATMA) and WISDOM (or Buddhi)
makes for the dual MONAD and is named at that stage also a MONAD
or the TWO-IN-ONE. It is essentially the "Egg" of Brahma where
the polar opposites of Spirit and Matter form the basis for
contrast.
Then at that level, but conceptually it is third, is the
MANIFESTED LOGOS or the THREE-IN-ONE. It consists of Spirit,
Matter and MIND. The mind is essential as it is the BASIS FOR
PERCEPTION. It perceives the difference between Force, Energy,
Power, and all the various kinds of Forms in which those work.
The whole scheme is laid out in the SECRET DOCTRINE starting at
about p. 153 and on p. 200 is a diagram that helps to explain
what is said up to then, but all the intervening pages ought to
be read as they are relevant.
On p. 181, SD Vol. 1, HPB gives an insight into the 3 lines of
evolution that conjoin to form our Universe/World, and thus are
the seat of man's consciousness and evolution as a
MIND-BEING--living in a physical body and having as goal, the
perfection of spiritual Wisdom in potential.
I hope this is not too confusing. A good deal of study is needed
to grasp this. There is a shorter book which is true to the
SECRET DOCTRINE and which can be read in a shorter time to secure
the basic ideas. It is named THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY, by Wm. Q.
Judge. If you can get it, or have it, look and read chapters 2,
3, 4, 14, and 15.
I mention this because the whole evolutionary scheme which starts
with the metaphysics of the MONAD (or a "ray" of the Universal
Spirit) HAS TO PASS THROUGH THE Man-Mind stage and then return to
the Spiritual level having experienced all the many kinds of
situations in the physical, emotional and mental planes that make
up our environment and in which each of us all the time are
involved, while we live in our physical bodies.
Man is said to be a "microcosm" of the Great "Macrocosm." All
the powers and potencies of vast Nature are locked up in him
right now. And it is our task, incarnation after incarnation to
grasp and understand with our newly developing Minds, and then,
use them with care and benevolence for the benefit of all. In so
doing we benefit ourselves and do not incur "bad" Karma. The
idea is that the common source (Spirit) makes all men and all
other Beings brothers. Hence as we would not be hurtful to a
brother, so we would not expect to be hurt. No one, unless they
develop this attitude will ever be ever trusted with real
knowledge and power under the laws of Nature which are immutable.
We are all free within bounds. We can all progress freely at our
own rate so long as we stay within reasonable bounds. Even the
laws of our land (and the rest all around the world) seek to
apply this principle with as much equity as can be mustered.
>of man is essential to do this. The "dreamer" is always the ONE
>CONSCIOUSNESS that is our true self, the decision maker and the
>user of the Mind as of all other faculties. It is the pupil
>working in the school of Life from incarnation to incarnation
and
>using all the many personalities. Our character and capacities
>are evidence of what we have learned and also indicate what
>remains for us to learn.
(we are the dreamers, the world-makers....)
DALLAS IMAGINATION is called the "King faculty" - it enables us
to plan our future. It is the active basis of the moral nature
that we have to develop. It is the study of Karma and the whole
of Nature in evolution.
==============================
>7. You seem to confuse the idea of the UNIVERSAL SOUL with our
>own Soul Identity. Our identity is our identity. The Soul is
>the MIND. It is your Monad which is using and working through
>the mental faculties. The Mind serves to link the creative
>SPIRITUAL powers and forces with the MATERIAL FORMS and
>LIMITATIONS. In great Nature or the UNIVERSE IN MANIFESTATION
>there is a corresponding link which consists of the united
>faculties of all Mind-beings.
Or the corollory - all mind-beings exist because of the ONE link,
but do
they exist objectively? I personally reject objectivism.
DALLAS; perception AS WE EMPLOY IT EVEN NOW is always mental.
The senses input information, which is transformed into images in
the brain for the MIND to assess and present to the Perceiver
which is superior to it in executive power. Then, looking
outward, the Perceiver sees, or uses some other sense to make a
picture of what is "out there." We are always bound by our
senses. Inwardly we are free of them, as we make our own
perceptions real, and save the memory and impression of them: 1,
as physical, or non-physical; 2, as emotions and feelings of
attraction or rejection; 3. As mind memories.
I mention these because we can experiment and see for ourselves
if the statement is true. Science has recently determined and
proved that the brain is not the mind. I secured this from
SCIENCE NEWS of 2 weeks ago.
>It is the universal cement that unites all living things and the
>source of LAW and justice and fairness. Some term it divine
>love. In another way we could call it the UNIVERSAL MONAD in
>which and from which all individual Monads have emerged. No
this
>many be asking you to stretch your mind a good deal, but words
>are such limiting traps. It is the story of the "Eye" versus
the
>"Heart" doctrine, always.
This makes me think of a film title i recently saw 'Love is the
Devil'.
======================================================
DALLAS; all contrasts are in close proximity. The value of
experience lies in the fact that we do know there is a
difference, and place MORAL values in judging our observations.
====================================
>8. Necessity is a good question. Why not simply say we are all
>here together. We are all asking why. And this kind of
>discussion brings out what we know and don't know. Some
surmises
>are then checked out to see if they are valid or not in other
>minds. If you have the SD, check vol. 2, p. 176 top on Desire
>(Universal Desire) also something is written on that on II p.
>578-9 and 484 bottom. One thing is sure: we are not the
>playthings of some vast Power. And certainly not of a whimsical
>and cruel "Personal God." The fact that there are so many
>religions and beliefs, and there is no move to either unify them
>or erase them, ought to make it plain that they are constructed
>by men to subjugate others. Hence they befuddle the mind.
What I mean by 'necessity' is more like - Is there something we
MUST be
doing or something that MUST be done. Is there some really
important goal
or can we take our progress at a leisurely pace? Is there some
horrible
punishment for failure? I don't mean on a personal level - I
fully
understand that we are all our own judges in the after-death
'weighing of
the heart' and give ourselves our own subjective devachanic
Heaven or Hell.
DALLAS: As mind-beings we set our own pace always. Nature goes
on at a pace that we have yet to fully understand. Part of our
living (assuming that we are immortals and that the School of
experience will cover many, many incarnations) is learning to
determine what is essential and what is not. Maslow developed a
catalogue of "wants" and "needs". The Perceiver within is also
the Discriminator and is subtly aware of the rule of necessity.
The "Voice of Conscience" is an illustration of this. It comes
from "within" it is a warning "voice" that in effect says: "You
did that before and got hurt. Why do it again ?" Very often we
discard that warning, but, it is always there. Theosophy says
that it is our HIGHER SELF (the Perceiver and Discriminator)
which warns us (the embodied mind). It is the Real man, the
inner Immortal. It speaks at such moments to the man of embodied
mind and physical action and experience.
>11. The "Dreamspell" of the Mayas is an illustration of the
>present mind-desire linkage. It produces selfishness. When we
>see the alternative, we make the effort to break the "spell."
>Necessity is the pathway that leads on in our own evolution. We
>begin to "widen out to the Universal."
Just out of interest the Mayans beleive the Dreamspell will end
for
collective humanity (this race) on December 22 2012. At least
their
cyclical calendar ends on this date - and it's start date was
interestingly
enough the day Adonis D ploughed into Atlantis sinking it beneath
the waves.
Dallas: Is there a date for that.
According to ancient Egyptian records the sinking of the last
Atlantis island Poseidonis was in 9,566 BC SD II 406 444fn, Isis
I 589-594, "The Deluge of Deucalion".
I am curious to know when the Mayan calendar began.
If you have the SECRET DOCTRINE look up in Vol II pp 68-70 for
the chronology of the ancient Hindus.
>14. A STRANGE STORY is a marvelous example .......g. As
to Jung's
"making contact with the
>animus" - it has two meanings apparently: 1.) animating or
>actuating spirit, and 2.) a feeling or spirit of hostility or
>hatred and animosity. The first seems neutral enough, as our
>motive lend it coloring, morally. The second in on the "Dark
>Side" as I suggested. But that needs to be defined, each for
>himself. Jung devised special words to serve as short-cuts in
>conveying ideas. Theosophy does the same, but it also
simplifies
>and tries to make relations clear when conveying concepts. Why
>need the "dark side" be encouraged? Who created it? If we can
>determine that we will know what to do.
I don't think 'anyone' created a dark side. it just is. And by
contacting
ones inner darkside I don't mean encouraging it - more like a
facing all of
ones deepest fears...
Dallas: You are right in that. The "personality" which dies
eventually for all of us fears. The Individuality, the Real Man,
is an immortal and for it there is no fear.
=====================================================
>15. Bardo needs adjustment with the Theosophical concepts. KEY
>TO THEOSOPHY on after-death states ought to be used.
Look I have a problem with that personally as I've stated before.
The KEY
seems to be very simplistic (almost like What Dreams May
Come???). The
Bardo is in fact very scientific. When one actually experiences
Wave
Vibration reality or the elements 'collapsing or withdrawing'
into one
another the Bardo's meanings become lucid. To me devachan is just
one small
part of the Bardo's - as I've said before the 'Hallucinatory
Theatre'. (is
SOMA mortomimetic? can we recreate the death process for
ourselves, a sort
of trial run? )
DALLAS Admittedly the description of the Devachanic experience
in the KEY is simple. Remember that it was a novel idea for the
time it was presented and had to be shown to be reasonably in
line with karma and life. The details are covered in other
articles and are quite extensive. Since I am not familiar with
all the ramifications of the BARDO I cannot at this moment make
comments on them, and compare them with what I have learned from
Theosophical doctrines. I imagine that there is a concordance,
but would have to go into it to find out.
=======================================
>Best wishes to you, Dal
And to you as always,
Darren
"devil inside, devil inside, every single one of us...the devil
inside" - INXS
DALLAS:
In Theosophy the only "devil" is our willful desire to disregard
the laws of nature. However that is silly as Nature is
all-powerful, as well as just and compassionate. We could not
live for an instant without the entire cooperation of Nature in
her most minute parts. The real enemy of man is his unbridled
desire and passionate inner nature.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 17 11:45:39 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA05902 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:38:04 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:19:13 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
Subject: Theos-World Help is in the SD. Or is it?
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>>The whole scheme is laid out in the SECRET DOCTRINE starting at about
p. 153 and on p. 200 is a diagram that helps to explain what is said up
to then, but all the intervening pages ought to be read as they are
relevant.>>
Dallas, this is a purely personal observation here, and I know that you
mean well, but I have discovered that there is not even a handful of
Theosophists who understand the figure on page 200, which compares HPB's
GV Model with the Tree of Life, and hardly any two who will agree with
each other on the "whole scheme." My experience in conversations with
others is that "helps to explain" is more often than not an "obscure to
hide." This subject was discussed years ago on theos-l, and no two of
us agreed on anything. I am convinced that discussions on this
convoluted subject are a waste of time, because without personal
experience in both the Tree of Life and the GV Globes, mentation (alias
logic and reason) leads to nothing but confusion.
This is, or should be, a point of major concern for all Theosophists.
Judge predicts that the GV Model will become the "cornerstone" of a new
Western Occultism, so he at least thought it was of vital importance.
However, few Theosophists understand it, or even care. Several
Theosophists commented on theos-l that the Tree of Life was better
anyway. I think that a good explanation of the GV Model is essential if
Theosophy is to live very long, but all of my attempts to explain it
have come to naught, and even Quest rejected an articel and a proposed
book on the subject.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 17 13:59:01 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA24375 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:59:42 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <00a701be5aa7$03815b40$850b9cd1@wilma>
From: "Govert W. Schuller"
To: "Theosophy list"
Subject: Theos-World Murdered Prince
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 12:54:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3115.0
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hello brothers,
I'm involved in a little discussion about the Jesuits and the
Templars on another list.
My question to you is, if any of you know which Prince HPB is
talking about in the following quote:
[[Vol. 2, Page 385]] THE LAST REAL TEMPLAR PRINCE POISONED.
"Turning to Clavel, one of the best Masonic authorities, we read:
"It is clear that the erection of the French Order of the Knight
Templars is not more ancient than the year 1804, and that it
cannot lay any legitimate claim to being the continuation of the
so-called society of 'la petite Resurrection des Templiers,' nor
this latter, either, extend back to the ancient Order of the
Knights Templars." Therefore, we see these pseudo-Templars, under
the guidance of the worthy Father Jesuits, forging in Paris,
1806, the famous charter of Larmenius. Twenty years later, this
nefast and subterranean body, guiding the hand of assassins,
directed it toward one of the best and greatest princes in
Europe, whose mysterious death, unfortunately for the interests
of truth and justice, has never been -- for political reasons --
investigated and proclaimed to the world as it ought to have
been. It is this prince, a Freemason himself, who was the last
depository of the secrets of the true Knights Templar. For long
centuries these had remained unknown and unsuspected.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 17 20:45:54 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id TAA09622 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:41:07 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Help is in the SD. Or is it?
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 18:40:13 -0800
Message-ID: <000001be5ae8$02d9e720$210e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 17th
I will be glad to try, and must caution you that any explanation
I might offer is of course limited to the views that I have
generated through my own study - as anyone else will also say,
and they therefore may not agree with others as you already
observe.
But first help me in telling me what the "G V Model" is and where
can I see it.
Your inquiry is quite general, and I cannot claim to understand
the Western Kabala as modified by those who christianized it. I
can say something about the left hand side of the diagram, but
little about the right hand (Kabalistic) side.
Dal
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of
Gerald Schueler
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 1999 8:19 AM
Subject: Theos-World Help is in the SD. Or is it?
>>The whole scheme is laid out in the SECRET DOCTRINE starting at
about
p. 153 and on p. 200 is a diagram that helps to explain what is
said up
to then, but all the intervening pages ought to be read as they
are
relevant.>>
Dallas, this is a purely personal observation here, and I know
that you
mean well, but I have discovered that there is not even a handful
of
Theosophists who understand the figure on page 200, which
compares HPB's
GV Model with the Tree of Life, and hardly any two who will agree
with
each other on the "whole scheme." My experience in conversations
with
others is that "helps to explain" is more often than not an
"obscure to
hide." This subject was discussed years ago on theos-l, and no
two of
us agreed on anything. I am convinced that discussions on this
convoluted subject are a waste of time, because without personal
experience in both the Tree of Life and the GV Globes, mentation
(alias
logic and reason) leads to nothing but confusion.
This is, or should be, a point of major concern for all
Theosophists.
Judge predicts that the GV Model will become the "cornerstone" of
a new
Western Occultism, so he at least thought it was of vital
importance.
However, few Theosophists understand it, or even care. Several
Theosophists commented on theos-l that the Tree of Life was
better
anyway. I think that a good explanation of the GV Model is
essential if
Theosophy is to live very long, but all of my attempts to explain
it
have come to naught, and even Quest rejected an articel and a
proposed
book on the subject.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 18 12:09:06 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA06774 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:57:38 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:55:38 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World The G.V. Model
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>But first help me in telling me what the "G V Model" is and where
can I see it.<
Dallas, I call HPB's globes & planes the Gupta Vidya Model or gp model
for short. She gave it as 7 globes on the four lower planes. de Purucker
expanded it to 12 globes on 7 planes, and it is his model that I always
refer to. According to this model, we are currently reincarnating as a
human lifewave on Globe D, the lowest of all globes of our planetary
chain.
All life flows down the left (Arc of Descent) and up the right side (Arc
of Ascent) in a widdershins or counterclockwise direction.
The figure on page 200 of the SD compares HPB's gv model with the Tree
of Life, implying very strongly that her Globes are the equivalent of
the Sephiroth but simply placed into another configuration. The tree
structure of Sephiroth is now a circular chain of worlds. The 7 planes,
three above (shown as a triangle in the figure) and four below separated
by the Abyss, still remain.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 18 17:20:32 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id RAA20127 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 17:09:59 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World The G.V. Model
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 16:09:16 -0800
Message-ID: <000501be5b9c$169d83c0$660e75ce@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 18
Thanks Jerry
Now I understand. On the whole I agree with what you observe.
I have not seen how GdeP derived his idea of 12 globes, but I
expect that this can be done with the idea of a mirror set placed
immediately below those illustrated by HPB on p. 200 and
correlated with the 12 zodiacal signs. That would have to be
verified.
I say this based on the idea of the 2 sets of "indriyas" the
kama-indriyas and the gnyan-indriyas - or the sense of perception
(gnyan-indriyas)and the senses through which action takes place
(kama-indriyas). But that is only a tentative speculation of
mine and would have to be verified. In essence it would be
saying "As above, So below."
Would be interesting to get some further verification of these
ideas.
Dal
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 21 06:11:22 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id FAA01164 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 21 Feb 1999 05:53:48 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To: "Theos Talk"
Subject: Theos-World Teaching and resistance to teaching == What would Theosophy offer ?
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 04:52:44 -0800
Message-ID: <000301be5d99$15ff87c0$a50e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Feb 21st 1999
Dallas offers
The desire to teach is sometimes presented over-enthusiastically.
We all have, as a soul urging, impulses or duties to express what
we feel (or have found) to be true.
Sometimes our wish to help can overwhelm both us and others. It
may seem to others that we desire to discipline them into
thinking or behaving as we would do - a kind of regimentation.
This produces either a resentment or a submission. The natural
independence of the spirit is always evoked, I think, by asking
questions that lead to self-reflection. But why is there in each
human such a "spirit of independence?" What is the nature of
"man?" What is the power of the "mind?" [ see SD II 484 ]
If we are, in effect, mirrors of the infinite Self, [ SD I
570-574 ] then in our limited brain-minds we have to develop a
view of the potential, and then, the actual knowledge of the
"Universal," and, that is: internal. I say this because if the
Universal Principle of ALL, is "universal," then each of us has
the same potentials and powers of observation, reasoning and
learning as anyone else. WE need to develop the "will" to find
and use those.
How can we get people to look inside and to trust their own
powers of reasoning, when they are seen to be swayed by desires?
It is a great puzzle: how to be a good teacher of anything? We
can point to principles, which if true, are universal. Can we
lead pupils to seek for the wisdom that is interior? Can we
inspire them with examples from their own experience? Can we
take the time to find out what their own interests, capacities
and talents are and then encourage and challenge them to develop
those potentials?
I think that the greatest barrier is the one which integrates
these two great factors: Our desire to learn and our desire to
be lazy.
We all have minds but we do not all desire to use them fully.
The problem to me then is: how do we discipline our desires ?
What shall we adopt as the best in the long run? This drives me,
the enquirer, to ask which (or who) is the Controller in me: the
Mind, or the desires? But I see that I can direct the mind and I
can subdue my desires. So the "I" in me is different from either
mind or desires.
The "Mind" I use as a tool. I can blunt it or sharpen it. The
desires are confusing and often an impediment. They are most
difficult to confront and control. I ask myself: which are
valuable and which are self-destructive? How do I get to isolate
and examine "desire" using the "mind?"
Most people desire a formula or a rite, or something that another
has devised, so they can either memorize it without reasoning it
out, or, if misapplied, they can blame the teacher for. Few
realize that with knowledge also comes responsibility. The fact
of "responsibility" or "duty" frightens or annoys many. Why
should that be so?
The great problem as I see it, is that we, who have some
knowledge of the operations of Nature that integrate all these
questions and problems, have to lead slowly, providing the
information that is essential. It can be shown to be useful and
something that anyone can control with their own will.
In a school or academy in our present world, as a teacher, with a
curriculum to complete in a set time, the pupils have to be
encouraged to learn (actually, to remember) those formulas which
they can use to solve examples and exercises set to enforce those
theorems. In life we find that there is no such discipline or
time-agenda. If we want to laze, or divert ourselves, we can do
so. If we wish to live disciplined or inquisitive lives, we can
do that also. There are a million ways in which anyone can
direct their living. But, is there a certain optimum? And if
so, how do we define it, and how do we practice living in that
direction? We can offer information and examples, but no one can
forever enforce their vision or ideals on others without evoking
a reaction, a resentment. However, everyone instinctively (or
rather intuitionally) recognizes a universal truth when it is
described.
In mathematics there is no leeway between the one true answer and
all the errors. In logic it is a little more obscure, because
the matter of sentiment arises, and a question of liking or
disliking an answer that we arrive at, internally, may prevent us
from arriving at a universally and true result. Some results are
unpleasant to our "desire nature."
What shall we do? Remain ignorant and happy, or try to become
wise, and in the meantime, discipline our own desires and channel
them into the disciplines that lead to a knowledge of the true?
For some this is easier than for others. But, everyone has the
freedom to make up their own mind, ultimately, regardless of how
others think they ought to behave.
In Theosophy, as in all philosophical systems, there is the
problem of "basis." How do we establish (or prove the
correctness of) a basis that is fair, just and true, as well as
useful? How do we test it? If it is UNIVERSAL and open to all
to seek for verification, the answers are more likely to be true.
Theosophy claims to be a record or a report on the "wisdom of the
Ages." [SD I 272-3] It has no curriculum outside of our own
living. It looks at all aspects of individual and collective
life. It inquires into motive, into the power of thought into
the results fanciful or real of desire, etc. It does not give
rites, rotes, or formulas. It encourages a study of all the ways
and laws of nature, and a search for the best way to apply them
to ourselves as members of the world community of interactive
agents.
The basis is (for most) a "belief" about GOD. Is it a UNIVERSAL
PRINCIPLE, or is it a He, a She or an all-powerful whimsical
being that enjoys being praised and gives or withholds with
neither rime nor reason? Does one religion or system give better
protection or assistance over others? Is it a refuge for
thinkers, or for hopeful (but blind) believers who are forever
unsure? How do we test the rites, creeds, claims, dogmas and
observances of any or all religions? Does that "religion," or
"belief-system" encourage us to do this? Or, do they discourage
such search?
Next: are there rules and laws in the Universe for mathematics,
and for Science in all its many departments where various aspects
of Nature are studied? Are those rules invariable, useful,
always capable of being proved, or are they (theories, guesses,
hypotheses, constantly changeable? Is our pursuit of knowledge a
matter of temperament, or a capacity that all have in various
degrees? If there are impediments to such a desire, what are
they? Is laziness and a desire for ease such an impediment, and
is it to be encouraged?
Is the evolution of: 1. the bodily form, 2. the emotional
nature, and 3. the mind, subject to rules and laws (ethics,
morals)? And if so, how are they to be defined, and can
applications be made that are universally fair and just for all?
Should anything be enforce on others? Do the "rich" have more in
their favor than the "poor?" If so, why? (And if so, what does
it say about the condition of our present civilization?) Should
the "poor" apply unethical methods to become powerful? Is ethics
a science? Does psychology, as at present taught in our
academies, a complete answer? Does ease, happiness, contentment,
etc... depend on an inner attitude or the acquisition of the
power to purchase them?
Does Theosophy present answers to these questions? If so where,
and how do we verify them?
These are some of the questions that have puzzled us all for many
years. We have all found some answers to them that seem to
satisfy, but, when we present them, we do not find that everyone
is eager to listen or talk about them. So, in many cases, as
constant "seekers for truth" we may find ourselves isolated. But
there is always, somewhere, a band of such "seekers," who discuss
and work together to prove the value of their search and hope to
spread the pleasure of such search to others.
It is quite rare, but always rewarding to find others engaged in
the same timeless quest. In spite of many disappointments and
discouragements, if we persevere in dong the best we can we need
not worry about how others react. Our persistence and example in
the way we live our lives (if they are kind friendly and
"universal" ones) eventually brings us true friendships.
There is a need for weighing all those who approve, against those
who do not. Then to find out in what areas that disapproval is
shown. Following that, we need to ask ourselves if we (our
methods of presentation, our attitude), or the subject of study,
have caused that difference. Is there something in us which is
causing the annoyance of others? Are we impatient of results,
and is this shown by an urging of others to perform as we think
they ought to? Then: How do we make a bridge to draw objectors
in--to seeing our point of view--rather than our resenting their
views as such. Can we put ourselves figuratively in their place
and look at ourselves with their vision?
I wonder if this is of any help and the questions and
observations you offer?
Best wishes to you,
Dallas
* * * * * * * * * *
* ORIGINAL MESSAGE
I don't know if it was that bad, but a simple misunderstanding
grew out into people assuming I deliberately talked down on them.
The fact is that I am a teacher (math & chemistry) so I am used
to try and help people understand things better. But now the
effort was not appreciated at all, in fact it was interpreted as
an insult. And only because the person did not in fact
misunderstand, so I was answering a question that did not exist.
Perhaps I should become less inclined to help? How is that for a
theosophist, or a person trying to be one? No, I will continue
to try and explain when I think I have a relevant answer or
comment. Perhaps my skin needs to become more like one from an
elephant.
K - - - - -
===============================================
---
END OF DIGEST
---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: DALVAL@NWC.NET
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-539B@list.vnet.net
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 21 10:50:53 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA18210 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 21 Feb 1999 10:40:38 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990221103716.00d400a8@mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 10:37:16 -0600
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: M K Ramadoss
Subject: Re: Theos-World Teaching and resistance to teaching == What
would Theosophy offer ?
In-Reply-To: <000301be5d99$15ff87c0$a50e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 04:52 AM 2/21/1999 -0800, Dallas wrote:
>Most people desire a formula or a rite, or something that another
>has devised, so they can either memorize it without reasoning it
>out, or, if misapplied, they can blame the teacher for.
Well said Dallas. Let me add my 0.02.
I think much of the blame should go to system of education most of have
gone through. While it is true that when dealing with technical work such
as fixing a car or somethingof the nature, then a system when followed
would yield results.
In non physical matters -- matters relating to spirit, does the same thing
work. If matters of spirit cannot be communicated by one person to another,
then can there be a system which can be communicated which will yield
results. Many fervently believe that if you follow a system, you will reach
enlightenment or be born into the next root-race, or be initiated in
natures secrets, reach a high spiritual position or whatever. Some believe
song and dance will yield spiritual results.
There is yet another less discussed aspect of systems which have teacher
and taught. It is human nature for one to have or try to have control over
the behaviour of others. Pseudo teachers try to control the speech and
actions of their "followers" -- in effect making them morons -- mind you
one can be a very learned person but still do not recognize that they are
still in a prison of their own making; and of course they are very
comfortable with it. It is like many prisoners who having been in a prison
for a long time are very comfortable with prison conditions and many not
even know what it is to be outside. We cannot argue with them and have to
leave them alone. On the other hand from time to time one has to come out
and shout when Emperor has no clothes. Simple truth may be difficult to see.
mkr
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Sun Feb 21 23:43:55 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id XAA30011 for theos-talk-outgoing; Sun, 21 Feb 1999 23:33:12 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19990222161157.0084dd60@ozemail.com.au>
X-Sender: dport@ozemail.com.au (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.2 (32)
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 16:11:57 +1000
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: "D. Porter"
Subject: Theos-World The Man from Atlantis
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dallas,
You asked about the Mayan date for Atlantis. Well for them it is 0.0.0.0
but in our terms it would be : On the 5th of June 8498 BC at 8pm in the
evening.
(the fourth asteroid of the Adonis group impacted the earth at 73 degrees
west of the dateline. The asteroid weighing over 2 x 10^12 tonnes with a
diameter of 10 kilometres, broke into 2 large pieces and thousands of
smaller fragments. The two massive stellar visitors sank the island shelf
of Atlantis. The Azore islands are the only remnants of this once great
civilisation. Ample Geological evidence is avialable - Please see 'The
Secret of Atlantis' - Otto Muck)
Regards,
Darren
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 09:04:28 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id IAA06667 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 08:48:35 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990222144715.1976.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World WQ Judge Believes He is in Communication with Dead Blavatsky
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 06:47:14 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
W Judge's 1895 letter on
messages he was receiving from dead
Blavatsky
Letter in handwriting of
W Judge and preserved in
Archives, Theosophical Society,
Pasadena, CA. Letter
published in "O E
Library Critic", Novem
1932 by editor Dr H N
Stokes. Letter dated
Jan 4, 1895. Date verified
& confirmed in Dr Stokes
article. Date confirmation
also found in E S T circular
April 3, 1896. Confirmation received
W Judge residing in New York in
Jan '95. Also Judge not
in England in Jan '95 or Jan
'96. Note also '95 letter is
E S T handwritten letter & not
printed E S T circular.
D Green
"All Communications herein must be
marked 'Private' and contain no
other Business.
E.S.T.
WILLIAM Q. JUDGE
144 Madison Avenue,
New York, Jan. 4, 1895
Dr. A. Keightley
(for Councillors etc.)
Comrades
Enclosed is an exact transcript of what
HPB said to me Jany 3, prematurely
ended by a visitor - as usual & as
results from European continual nagging at me.
It is word for word. More will be said later.
You can let all worthy & devoted loyalists
read this - It may be read in a proper group.
Copies not to be made. This is to be kept
with Council papers.
Fraternally
William Q. Judge
Go to no extremes in thought or act
hereupon."
Transcript of dead Mrs Blavatsky's message
to W Judge enclosed in Judge's letter:
"HPB. Jany 3 1895
Yours is not a (bootless) or fruitless) errand.
You have nobly sustained our cause in the
crisis. Be encouraged. Well did Master know
the staunch fearless attributes of your soul when
he directed me to make you leader of our craft in
America. As the centre of our force is attacked
the more does our light work for the right. Victory
is ours. All will end for the good of all. Mistakes
have been made but you have not gone far from
the lines laid down by Master. My desire is for
you to be careful about sending out Instructions
to the E.S. for treacherous and unworthy persons
are within the gates, & all new ideas will be
appropriated by the other side after x x x x. The
forces are out and annihilation is the only thing
that can interfere.
Let me tell you some of the things I have learned
since I absented myself from the outer world. Many
of the problems of life that should have been solved
if we had been more together have come up before me
& I have learned much. I am, next to the American
work, interested in Spain. Ireland can take care of
itself. In the pine woods I have found a lodge which
I knew something about before I went away. There,
seven chelas & the light they show that some day will
be better known, I will describe to you at our next
meeting. There is much connected with it that can be
used for irradiating forces in this country for there is
a subtle connection. Be sure that at our next meeting
it is not forgotten x x x x Slowly the light from this
Lodge is being thrown over Spain & I see that from the
old corpse of bigotry superstition & credulity will be
reared a temple of light which will unite its forces with
that of America & Ireland & from these three points
I know that humanity will be saved. x x x
This battle of light & darkness in our midst seems but
small (little) when I view the work before us x x x and the
ends and prospects of our work shall stem the tide of this
cruel & unworthy persecution. Under all work shall
stem the tide of this cruel & unworthy persecution. Under
all of it & over it all the Masters hand; be sure that all
is well for thee. x x x x.
The light mentioned in Spain is of seven sides & a purple
& yellow light. On each of the seven sides is a star. This
represents the Lodge of Spain. Connect yourself with it as
you will be directed. x x x
I will not permit you to resign nor will I permit you to submit
to further investigation. Form your plans for the American
work. Keep all your lines perfect with sustaining points &
leave the rest to us. This is to your questions of last night.
x x x x x
I will not touch on minor points. They will take care of
themselves. Master is not after minor points. Let us turn
our eyes to the American future of Theosophy. x x x x
(Interruption & conclusion by a visitor)"
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 09:19:29 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA10099 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:14:49 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <199902221513.HAA00865@f32.hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Esoteric Group in the United Lodge of Theosophists
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:13:35 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
I'm continuing my research on
W Judge's life and have been
researching of late the United
Lodge of Theosophists who hold Judge
in high esteem.
I read in Dr Bruce Campbell's history of
the Theosophical Movement---
"The author has heard reports of an
esoteric group in the U.L.T., but has not
been able to discover any firm information
about this." page 226
Can anyone on theostalk shed any light
on this subject?
I've been told by my London correspondent
that the ULT esoteric group reissued
Mrs Blavatsky's Esoteric Papers. Does
any one know more about this?
David
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 09:49:57 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA11835 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:33:30 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990222153216.3394.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World ULT & The Theosophy Company
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:32:15 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
According to Dr Bruce Campbell,
the United Lodge of Theosophists is
actually run by the Theosophy Company,
a nonprofit California Corporation.
The Corporation is governed by a board of
7 trustees who have the ultimate power.
Does anyone know who these 7 trustees are?
They are not elected by ULT associates.
This board is the power behind the ULT,
Los Angeles & is accountable to no one
especially to the rank & file ULT associates,
a former ULTite tells me.
I'm trying to obtain the names of these
7 trustees. Would this be public information
in the State of California?
After R Crosbie's death, John Garrigues was
the major force in the ULT, LA. "In a 1938
case a court ruled that the U.L.T. was
a business belonging to John Garrigues,"
writes Campbell. After Garrigues died in 1944,
Grace Clough assumed the mantle. When she
died, Henry Geiger became president of the
Theosophy Company. I know Mr Geiger died
several years ago, but does anyone know who
became the leader of the ULT after he died?
David
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 10:49:46 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id KAA18377 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 10:39:02 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World The Man from Atlantis - Destruction of Poseidonis / Last Atlantis island
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:37:55 -0800
Message-ID: <000001be5e8a$152b2740$9e0e97cf@netway.nwc.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19990222161157.0084dd60@ozemail.com.au>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2120.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Thanks Darren
I will secure a copy. The dates seem specific enough, but they
conflict by about 1,068 years with the date 9,566 BC said to be
the "Deluge of Deucalion."
I have found these References:
Mahatma Letters, p. 155; Five Yrs, of Thy. P. 99fn; SD II 406
444fn and Isis I 589-94;
Does the date 2012 correspond to any event that is foretold in
the Mayan writings ? Or is it left blank ?
I notice that the total cycle is taken to be 10,500 years and I
see that this corresponds roughly to half the Sidereal Year of
25,868 years (12,934) - so I wonder how exact we can make these
agree.
Do you happen to know anything more about the Adonis group of
asteroids?
Dallas
======================================
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 14:37:48 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA13064 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:31:04 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Esoteric Group in the United Lodge of Theosophists
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 20:29:57 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be5ea2$1cef24a0$b65e95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <199902221513.HAA00865@f32.hotmail.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi David,
Would you tell us something about the aims of your research and how you are
hoping to use it when completed?
Thanks, Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of David Green
> Sent: 22 February 1999 15:14
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Theos-World Esoteric Group in the United Lodge of Theosophists
>
>
> I'm continuing my research on
> W Judge's life and have been
> researching of late the United
> Lodge of Theosophists who hold Judge
> in high esteem.
>
> I read in Dr Bruce Campbell's history of
> the Theosophical Movement---
>
> "The author has heard reports of an
> esoteric group in the U.L.T., but has not
> been able to discover any firm information
> about this." page 226
>
> Can anyone on theostalk shed any light
> on this subject?
>
> I've been told by my London correspondent
> that the ULT esoteric group reissued
> Mrs Blavatsky's Esoteric Papers. Does
> any one know more about this?
>
> David
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 14:52:51 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id OAA14398 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:43:35 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <9c70bfa.36d1befa@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 15:32:58 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World ULT & The Theosophy Company
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/22/99 3:49:45 PM, David Green wrote:
<>
David, I do know who the seven trustees are, but I can assure you they DON'T
"run" ULT, nor do they have "ultimate power." Listen to my experiences before
you brush off my assessment.
I have been involved in ULT for over a decade, and there are a number of
things I would change about ULT if I had the power to do so (which I don't).
At one time I too thought that the Theosophy Company controlled ULT, but I
have since learned that this simply isn't true. The board members simply
supervise the printing of books and the activities of the Los Angeles lodge
that require financing, like putting out money for newspaper ads. The board
members have no direct control over any other lodge or its finances, that I
know of, although the Los Angeles company does hold title to a few of the
buildings of other lodges. This is (presumably) because some lodges are small
and in danger of closing -- in absence of a clear title-holder, buildings tend
to revert to the state. But most ULT lodges own their buildings and property
themselves.
Neither this board, nor any one person, "controls" ULT, though I can see the
romantic attraction of such an idea. I have personally been to half a dozen
lodges, and a numbner of study groups in other areas, and I can report to you
that often they follow very different courses of study. The New York and Los
Angeles lodges tend to be more formal, and generally keep to Mr. Judge's OCEAN
OF THEOSOPHY, HPB's KEY TO THEOSOPHY and other classics, year after boring
year, no matter whether everyone in the group has read it 100 times before.
It find this boring, although I agree those classical works are important.
Other lodges have video programs (I recently heard of a video series on the
Old Testament being used by the Washington state group) while in San Diego
they are running a study of the social and political effects that various
world religions bring to their adherents. Santa Barbara is responsible, in
addition to other things, for the Institute of World Culture, which includes
inviting guest speakers, often from universities -- a program similar to that
carried out by the Bombay lodge in India. (More conservative lodges NEVER
invite guest speakers). The Paris and Dijon lodges contain members from the
scientific community (cool, huh?) and their programs tend to reflect those
interests.
I certainly don't mind stating that ULT has a problem with power flow, in that
it tends to get bogged down in the hands of the few without any guarantee of
democratic process. Many lodges tend to have a handful of old-timers that run
the show, and newcomers kind of have to "wait their turn" to have a
significant say in the program of study, or to be permitted to give talks from
the platform. Other lodges, however, have no problem with this. In the San
Diego lodge, for instance, I myself witnessed a vote by a show of hands as to
whether for the next year they would continue their world religions study
program. Their was no consultation with any "leader" and actually the person
who volunteered to supervise that particular study series is a relative
newcomer to that lodge.
So what I've learned about ULT, and what I'm sharing with you, is that while
it does have its problems (and some of its problems are quite significant,
like inflexibility) it is not an organization in the typical sense, and
individual lodges are truly free to act as they wish. I have found that
lodges tend to bow to the wishes of very senior students in LA and NY, but
this is not always the case, nor is there any mechanism to MAKE people follow
certain lines laid down. It tends to be a fact that the people who have the
most time to give to ULT are elderly people, retired, with time on their
hands. After being in the lodge 60 years or more, they tend to have very hard
and fast ideas as to "how things should be done" and don't take well to "back
talk." As one of the more rebellious associates of ULT, I have certainly felt
pressure to act in certain ways, but this has come from individuals, and not
from any organized program to make me toe the line.
So I encourage you to take ULT lodges independently, and not lump them all
together as a whole. Why not try visiting a few lodges as an undercover
student, without announcing your interest in studying them sociologically?
And then report what you find. This will get you farther than allegations
posted to a public forum.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Mon Feb 22 16:54:21 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA30103 for theos-talk-outgoing; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 16:41:42 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <000501be5eb4$5ba4be00$d98306d4@g2l4g2>
From: "Frank Reitemeyer"
To:
Subject: Re: Theos-World Esoteric Group in the United Lodge of Theosophists
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:16:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
There are rumours too that the TS in Pasadena has also its secret ES,
although the Point Loma ES was destroyed in 1946 and "officially" closed in
1951 by Conger and Long when the TS Pasadena was founded. Any light?
Frank
SNIP
>I read in Dr Bruce Campbell's history of
>the Theosophical Movement---
>
>"The author has heard reports of an
>esoteric group in the U.L.T., but has not
>been able to discover any firm information
>about this." page 226
>
>Can anyone on theostalk shed any light
>on this subject?
SNIP
>David
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 23 12:14:12 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA09708 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:11:50 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:09:27 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>>There are rumours too that the TS in Pasadena has also its secret ES,
although the Point Loma ES was destroyed in 1946 and "officially" closed
in 1951 by Conger and Long when the TS Pasadena was founded. Any light?
Frank>>
Well, after 30 plus years as a member of Pasadena, if they do have such
an ES, they never invited me to participate. I don't think that they
have such a thing. For one thing, who would lead it? Actually, Pasadena
strongly emphasizes the spirit of Theosophy and rather downplays the
letter.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Tue Feb 23 12:28:55 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id MAA11501 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:25:20 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:56:38 EST
To: TOY77@aol.com, Richtay@aol.com, theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Theos-World Unstoppable bacteria -- the beginning of the end?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
South CHina Morning Post
Monday=A0=A0February 22=A0=A01999
Untreatable 'superbug' kills woman
ELLA LEE
A hospital patient has been killed by a new strain of superbug that is
immune to antibiotics.
It is the first time the bug has been detected in Hong Kong, and was a
direct consequence of antibiotics abuse, a doctor warned.
The patient, admitted to Queen Mary Hospital with a fever, died despite
two weeks of intensive drug treatment to combat the vancomycin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA).
It had previously been found only in Japan, the United States and
France.
University of Hong Kong microbiologist Professor Yuen Kwok-yung said
that when the bacteria spread, no antibiotic was effective and
infections became untreatable.
"We are getting into the terminal stage. It is very dangerous; the
bacteria have broken the last defence," he said.
Doctors around the world are worried about the excessive use of
antibiotics producing drug-resistant bacteria which mutate as they fight
for survival.
"Ten years ago, Hong Kong for the first time found Streptococcus
pneumonia had become resistant to penicillin. Now, 70 per cent are
penicillin-resistant," Professor Yuen said.
"Now we've discovered our first VRSA case. We can't wait until things
get worse. The bacteria must have mutated; it is time to do something."
Staphylococcus aureus are virulent bacteria which live on human skin.
They enter the body through wounds and cause serious infections of the
skin, soft tissues, bones and joints.
The organism spreads through direct contact and can lead to pneumonia
and the fatal bacteremia, which has a 40 per cent mortality rate.
Some strains of Staphylococcus aureus, known as methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), became resistant to the antibiotic
methicillin and cloxacillin in the late 1970s.
Doctors have since then relied on vancomycin as the final weapon in
their defence arsenal.
The middle-aged woman killed by the superbug was admitted to Queen Mary
Hospital in mid-1998 after a prolonged high fever. She was also
suffering from cancer.
A medical assault using all kinds of antibiotics failed to kill the
bacteria.
The medical team was shocked when it found the vancomycin injections
failed. The woman died from bacteremia.
Professor Yuen said doctors were left with only experimental drugs in
the fight against VRSA. Their effectiveness was still uncertain.
The new strain of superbug was more dangerous than vancomycin-resistant
Enterococci. Enterococci, bacteria in the gut, are less virulent.
But merely reducing the excessive use of vancomycin would not help
eradicate VRSA. "We have to solve the problem from the root. If there is
no MRSA, there would be no VRSA. It is simple logic. We have to reduce
use of all antibiotics," Professor Yuen said.
"Patients need to be alerted. They should not seek antibiotics for a
quick cure. It is an issue for all doctors and patients."
The superbug was first found in Japan in 1997, when a boy's infected
surgical wound did not respond to 29 days of vancomycin treatment. Three
other cases have been reported in the US and one in France.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 00:42:29 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id AAA28638 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 00:32:13 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <9cf6905.36d39274@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 00:47:32 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/23/99 6:14:03 PM, you wrote:
<<>>There are rumours too that the TS in Pasadena has also its secret ES,
although the Point Loma ES was destroyed in 1946 and "officially" closed
in 1951 by Conger and Long when the TS Pasadena was founded. Any light?
Frank>>>>
Along with Jerry S., I can say that I strongly doubt Pasadena has an esoteric
section any longer. I am friends with Grace Knoche, Will Thackara, Alan
Donant, and other leaders at their headquarters, and I have asked them
privately and sincerely if there were now such a thing. They assured me there
was not.
Beyond this, all I can say is that if a group of individuals chooses to study
privately by themselves, what business is it of mine? Is the subject of
"esotericism" interesting only because it is secret? I would not feel
comfortable invading someone's private study and trying to publicize it.
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 07:27:20 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id HAA32167 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:23:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: Theos-World Question for David Green
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 13:22:47 -0000
Message-ID: <000301be5ff8$c5188840$f45c95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To:
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
David,
The more I relected on Jerry's and Rich's reply to your latest posts the
more I realised that almost all the posts you make to this group contain
reports of rumour and/or second hand slurs on people's character and
integrity.
What is the basis of your research? And how are you intending to use it?
Regards,
Peter
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 07:36:02 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id HAA32166 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:23:53 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 13:22:46 -0000
Message-ID: <000201be5ff8$c4584580$f45c95c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <9cf6905.36d39274@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Rich,
You wrote:
> Beyond this, all I can say is that if a group of individuals
> chooses to study
> privately by themselves, what business is it of mine? Is the subject of
> "esotericism" interesting only because it is secret? I would not feel
> comfortable invading someone's private study and trying to publicize it.
And quite right too.!
Peter
*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
> In a message dated 2/23/99 6:14:03 PM, you wrote:
>
> <<>>There are rumours too that the TS in Pasadena has also its secret ES,
> although the Point Loma ES was destroyed in 1946 and "officially" closed
> in 1951 by Conger and Long when the TS Pasadena was founded. Any light?
> Frank>>>>
>
> Along with Jerry S., I can say that I strongly doubt Pasadena has
> an esoteric
> section any longer. I am friends with Grace Knoche, Will Thackara, Alan
> Donant, and other leaders at their headquarters, and I have asked them
> privately and sincerely if there were now such a thing. They
> assured me there
> was not.
>
> Beyond this, all I can say is that if a group of individuals
> chooses to study
> privately by themselves, what business is it of mine? Is the subject of
> "esotericism" interesting only because it is secret? I would not feel
> comfortable invading someone's private study and trying to publicize it.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 11:20:38 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA32691 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 11:12:19 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990224171108.2893.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Question for David Green
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:11:07 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>David,
>The more I relected on Jerry's and Rich's reply to your latest posts
>the
>more I realised that almost all the posts you make to this group
>contain
>reports of rumour and/or second hand slurs on people's character and
>integrity.
>What is the basis of your research? And how are you intending to use
>t?
Peter, to what are you referring?
I've quoted from Dr Bruce Campbell's
history of TS & wanted to know
more about what he wrote on ULT. Is that such
a crime? What is your own statement?
A slur on my integrity & motivations?
As I've stated several times on this forum,
I'm interested in life of W Judge & intend
writing dissertation--book on controversy surrounding
his life. My interest in ULT stems from ULT's
esteem & defense of W Judge's life & work.
In looking thru my papers this morning,
I see my question on ULT esoteric group
was answered in letter from Mr John Copper
I received last March! I'll post some of that
soon.
David
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 12:05:13 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id LAA18115 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 11:53:31 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <19990224175220.13940.qmail@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [169.197.6.95]
From: "David Green"
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World ULT & The Theosophy Company
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 09:52:20 PST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Richard Taylor wrote------
>David, I do know who the seven trustees are, but I can assure you they
DON'T
>"run" ULT, nor do they have "ultimate power." Listen to my experiences
before
>you brush off my assessment.
>
>I have been involved in ULT for over a decade, and there are a number
of
>things I would change about ULT if I had the power to do so (which I
don't).
>At one time I too thought that the Theosophy Company controlled ULT,
but I
>have since learned that this simply isn't true. The board members
simply
>supervise the printing of books and the activities of the Los Angeles
lodge
>that require financing, like putting out money for newspaper ads. The
board
>members have no direct control over any other lodge or its finances,
that I
>know of, although the Los Angeles company does hold title to a few of
the
>buildings of other lodges. This is (presumably) because some lodges
are small
>and in danger of closing -- in absence of a clear title-holder,
buildings tend
>to revert to the state. But most ULT lodges own their buildings and
property
>themselves.
>
>Neither this board, nor any one person, "controls" ULT, though I can
see the
>romantic attraction of such an idea. I have personally been to half a
dozen
>lodges, and a numbner of study groups in other areas, and I can report
to you
>that often they follow very different courses of study. The New York
and Los
>Angeles lodges tend to be more formal, and generally keep to Mr.
Judge's OCEAN
>OF THEOSOPHY, HPB's KEY TO THEOSOPHY and other classics, year after
boring
>year, no matter whether everyone in the group has read it 100 times
before.
>It find this boring, although I agree those classical works are
important.
>
>Other lodges have video programs (I recently heard of a video series on
the
>Old Testament being used by the Washington state group) while in San
Diego
>they are running a study of the social and political effects that
various
>world religions bring to their adherents. Santa Barbara is
responsible, in
>addition to other things, for the Institute of World Culture, which
includes
>inviting guest speakers, often from universities -- a program similar
to that
>carried out by the Bombay lodge in India. (More conservative lodges
NEVER
>invite guest speakers). The Paris and Dijon lodges contain members
from the
>scientific community (cool, huh?) and their programs tend to reflect
those
>interests.
>
>I certainly don't mind stating that ULT has a problem with power flow,
in that
>it tends to get bogged down in the hands of the few without any
guarantee of
>democratic process. Many lodges tend to have a handful of old-timers
that run
>the show, and newcomers kind of have to "wait their turn" to have a
>significant say in the program of study, or to be permitted to give
talks from
>the platform. Other lodges, however, have no problem with this. In
the San
>Diego lodge, for instance, I myself witnessed a vote by a show of hands
as to
>whether for the next year they would continue their world religions
study
>program. Their was no consultation with any "leader" and actually the
person
>who volunteered to supervise that particular study series is a relative
>newcomer to that lodge.
>
>So what I've learned about ULT, and what I'm sharing with you, is that
while
>it does have its problems (and some of its problems are quite
significant,
>like inflexibility) it is not an organization in the typical sense, and
>individual lodges are truly free to act as they wish. I have found
that
>lodges tend to bow to the wishes of very senior students in LA and NY,
but
>this is not always the case, nor is there any mechanism to MAKE people
follow
>certain lines laid down. It tends to be a fact that the people who
have the
>most time to give to ULT are elderly people, retired, with time on
their
>hands. After being in the lodge 60 years or more, they tend to have
very hard
>and fast ideas as to "how things should be done" and don't take well to
"back
>talk." As one of the more rebellious associates of ULT, I have
certainly felt
>pressure to act in certain ways, but this has come from individuals,
and not
>from any organized program to make me toe the line.
>
>So I encourage you to take ULT lodges independently, and not lump them
all
>together as a whole. Why not try visiting a few lodges as an
undercover
>student, without announcing your interest in studying them
sociologically?
>And then report what you find. This will get you farther than
allegations
>posted to a public forum.
Richard, I apppreciate your long reply.
I've visited ULT Los Angeles twice & ULT
New York once. Nice bunch of people.
I'm puzzled by your closing remark about
>This will get you farther than allegations
>posted to a public forum.
Much of this was quoted directly from
Dr Campbell's historical study. The lady
who is my ULT contact comments that what you
write applies to last ten-fifteen years of
ULT. Things were different thirty-forty years ago.
She writes Grace Clough & Henry Geiger
literally ran the show at ULT Los Angeles.
In recent years, my informant tells me ULT
LA resisted selling S Cranston's biography
of Mrs Blavatsky. After much haggling, the "leaders"
finally gave their blessings & permission.
I see you know the names of the 7 directors.
Please share them. I'm sure you won't.
I learned yesterday their names,
etc. can be obtained thru the California
Secretary of State from the Corporation, Non-
Profit Division. It's called public information.
David
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Wed Feb 24 16:04:30 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id PAA15436 for theos-talk-outgoing; Wed, 24 Feb 1999 15:34:07 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <00a401be603d$40dab860$938306d4@g2l4g2>
From: "Frank Reitemeyer"
To:
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:30:38 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Rich:
In my opinion is is both of factual and historical interest. In various
Circulars from Pasadena on my desk James Long and Grace Knoche described
often why they choosed to destroy the Point Loma-Covina HQ ("I was working
as a shiva"), describing the Point Loma policy and spirit as "elitism" and
against the needs of the time. OTOH, the Pasadena policy is described as
"partnership".
Now, what are the facts? If the ES of Pasadena is not labeled as "ES" but as
"privately study group", then comes the question to my mind if and why this
policy is better for students than the old. In Point Loma times every member
of the TS has had the right to enter the ES (there was no fear of
"invaders" - Rich's word) and learn the teachings. This was the policy under
G. de Purucker, as well as it was under Judge, K. Tingley and HPB, and also
under Helen Harris (after GdeP's death). The ES has had an address and its
existence was known to all.
Today a student seems not to have a right to know of the existence of such a
"private" group or were he can go. So it may be for some researchers of
historical interest if the description of the Point Loma TS and ES is true -
or not. This is the more of interest as the official books printed by
Pasadena are not verbatim reprints of the PL books, they are "edited",
sentences, paragraphs and the least in one case a whole chapter are deleted.
So I wonder if the "private group" of the Pasadena TS is studying the same
texts which they have for the public or if they are studying the real texts.
I see some contradictions and I ask for any light about this to decide if
the judgement of Long and Knoche about the Point Loma era is true or not.
When an ES, its existence known to all, and open to all, is labeled as
"outmoded", "elitism" etc. and a secret group, whose existence is not known
publicy and were texts are studied which were formely relatively open and
were not restricted to persons which are "chosen" in an unknown fashion
which are labeled as "democratic" and "partnership" - then I am remembered
to George Orwell's "Animal farm".
Speaking from my own experience the theos. teachings and the historicals
events can hardly divided. It deals also with the question if such a group
is lead by humans or super humans. From the time of HPB onwards up to H.
Harris a potencially member was not choosen by any humanmade fashion or a
personal feeling of sympathy or anti-sympathy, but only by its own inner,
higher Self.
For those on the list who email me privately wondering if I attempt to hurt
any persons or organizations I may point out that I am searching for truth.
In the past I was critical too to other TS'ies as well and would have this
questions as well if the matter would have been belong to any other
organization. The motto runs not: There is no religion higher than the TS
XXX" but "..than truth". That's all. Hope that helps to clarify my position
as a theosophical student with interest in historical details. And my lesson
was not to believe any labelings or namings, but to look was is behind it.
An analogy may: Today some countries have the word "democratic" in their
country names, but often they are far less democratic than other countries.
Frank
>Along with Jerry S., I can say that I strongly doubt Pasadena has an
esoteric
>section any longer. I am friends with Grace Knoche, Will Thackara, Alan
>Donant, and other leaders at their headquarters, and I have asked them
>privately and sincerely if there were now such a thing. They assured me
there
>was not.
>
>Beyond this, all I can say is that if a group of individuals chooses to
study
>privately by themselves, what business is it of mine? Is the subject of
>"esotericism" interesting only because it is secret? I would not feel
>comfortable invading someone's private study and trying to publicize it.
>
>Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 02:37:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id CAA14185 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 02:27:45 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <901f147c.36d50929@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 03:26:17 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/24/99 10:04:10 PM, Frank wrote:
<>
Frank, I do *not* believe there is a "private study group" in the Pasadena-
based Theosophical Society.
But *IF* there were, I still don't think it's any one's business, especially
for purely historical reasons. The Theosophical Society shouldn't exist for
historical purposes, but for spiritual ones. Thus, only a spiritual motive
for joining esoteric study could be justified.
Besides which, don't people have a right to associate how and where they will?
In America freedom of assembly is a fundamental right of all citizens. I am
not a member of Pasadena's T.S., I don't claim to know their inner workings,
nor would it be any of my business. But if they had or have private study,
it's their right, good for them. I wish them well.
<>
If there are any private study groups, I suspect that they would welcome new
members! Otherwise they would die out, right? If anyone has the spiritual
drive to join a private study group or "esoteric section," why not write to
the appropriate organization, ask if there is any esoteric study, and how one
might apply? I would be most curious to learn what would happen if one did
this. I may try it myself. Unfortunately, the only addresses I have are
those of the big three theosophic associations: Adyar, Pasadena and ULT. So I
guess one should apply there...
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 02:53:00 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id CAA14210 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 02:28:11 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID: <4fd4dcb9.36d5092f@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 03:26:23 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Re: Theos-World ULT & The Theosophy Company
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/24/99 6:04:56 PM, David wrote:
<This will get you farther than allegations
>posted to a public forum.
Much of this was quoted directly from
Dr Campbell's historical study. The lady
who is my ULT contact comments that what you
write applies to last ten-fifteen years of
ULT. >>
David,
Allegations are no less allegations just because they are printed in a book!
I have read Campbell's book, in fact I have it here on my desk now. He makes
a great many allegations ("allegation" is simply the noun form of the verb "to
allege"). One of Campbell's greatest prejudices is against HPB herself, and
nearly every page of chapter 2 "The Writings of H.P. Blavatsky" repeats the
allegations of William Emmette Coleman that HPB plagiarized everything she
ever wrote.
So one cannot escape the taint of making "allegations" if one relies on a book
like Campbell's.
You ask me to reveal the names of the 7 board members of the Los Angeles
Theosophy Company -- but I am not on the board and I do not wish to interfere
in their work; I am not an associate who works through that lodge. If you are
so excited to learn of them, why not write to the following address: Theosophy
Company, 245 West 33rd St, Los Angeles CA 90007. Ask them directly -- then
they will have the right to reveal themselves or not. Why should that
decision be mine? Meanwhile, please do contact the California Secetary of
State for your "public information."
And what do we have when we have names on a list?
Interesting, David, that you ask for revelations, and yet keep the identity of
your ULT informant confidential. Are we not in the same boat? I don't wish
to bring notoriety upon the heads of the Theosophy Company, while I assume you
wish likewise to protect your informant from scrutiny. To criticize me for
keeping confidentiality is surely for the pot to call the kettle black.
<>
No doubt this is true, but curious indeed. It was leading members of the New
York ULT who wrote the HPB biography in the first place! So you can see that
no monolithic power controls ULT behind the scenes. One might say there is
too much disorganization and infighting for ULT to be an organization!
One thing Campbell writes of ULT is particularly worthy of investigation.
>From page 185,
"At the Parent Lodge in Los Angeles and in other lodges, there are nonprofit
corporations that control the assets of the lodge. The officers of these
corporations are the individuals who hold power in the U.L.T."
This latter allegation is manifestly untrue. I know of a great many people
"in power" in Los Angeles ULT, and most of them are not on the Board of
Trustees for Theosophy Company. The person who edits Theosophy Magazine, the
people who run study classes, the sole full-time staff person, many of the
most charistmatic platform speakers -- none of these associates are on the
Board. So we must assume there are different kinds of power, and the nature
of that power rests in how it is wielded and the motive high or low, not
necessarily how it is structured on paper.
We can surely agree that Mahatmas KH and M had (and have) tremendous spiritual
power, yet they don't appear to control any of the physical assets used by
ULT.
The larger question is not "who's on the board of Theosophy Company" but "what
is power and how is it to be used?"
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 06:38:02 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id GAA07148 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 06:24:56 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Question for David Green
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 12:23:47 -0000
Message-ID: <000001be60b9$b16735a0$8a6545c2@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <19990224171108.2893.qmail@hotmail.com>
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Hi David,
I'm making an observation, not an accusation, along with a desire to know
more about your views and how you are going to use your research. I
appreciate that in your posts you are passing on the views of others which
may not be your own. It's just that the theme that binds them all together
is one of casting aspersion on, if not mocking, the character of others.
The posts I have in mind are:
1. Your series of posts on the themes of Judge Communicates with dead
Blavatsky and Kingsley Channels dead Judge and culminating in quotes casting
doubt on the integrity and character of both Judge and Kingsly. For
example, Judge is a deluded leader, a guileless psychic: Mrs Tingley at
best self deluded, at worst a charlaton.
2. The post on 'Judge is Rajah' followed up by Pryse's mockery of Judge as
being ridiculous.
3. The R.A. Gilbert post asserting that devestating attacks on the Mahatma
Letters and the objectivity of Lillie and his attacks on the Mahatma Letters
have yet to be responded to.
4. The Post on Fictitious Tibet & Madame Blavatsky, a "pique" of mockery on
Theosophy and its founders, wherein it accused:
- Madame Blavatsky of being a phoney and self deluded fraud
- The Secret Doctrine as being "horrendous hogwash"
- The Esoteric Schools and Brotherhood as being a pure fiction
- The Masters of being a silly fiction of HPB's imagination
.. and casted Madame Blavatsky in the same light as the "aggressive
homsosexual" Leadbeater and Lobsang Rampa.
(Actually it was interesting that the writer of that article stated Henry
Olcott to be genuine and HPB to be a fraud, especially as both professed to
have the same Master and follow the same esoteric tradition. Olcott also
testified to meeting both the Master M & Master KH in the flesh, as did
Damador, Brown (who met KH) and others. Either this didn't seem worth
mentioning as it didn't support the author's views or our anthropological
author didn't research very deeply into the subject matter he professed to
know so much about.)
5. With your latest posts:
> Does anyone know who these 7 trustees are?
> They are not elected by ULT associates.
> This board is the power behind the ULT,
> Los Angeles & is accountable to no one
> especially to the rank & file ULT associates,
> a former ULTite tells me.
To ask who runs ULT and how they are elected is a simple question deserving
of a straight forward answer. But the way you put it came across to me as
more on the same theme - another round of reported rumour, allegation and
aspersion.
I imagine it may have come across to Rich in the same way. Hence his last
words to you in his reply:
> This will get you farther than allegations posted to a public forum.
6. All your posts above are qoutes from 'sources' with virtually no views
of your own attached. In order to discover something about the latter I
glanced back to see what other posts you had made over the last few months.
The only ones I could find were your dialogues with Tony (re: Koothoomi
Unveiled) which contained yet another round of mocking a theosphist for his
views.
So I am naturally wondering how you see the Teachings of Theosophy, its
students, Madame Blavatsky, Judge & so on, and how this will inform your
research. Of course, you are entitled to whatver views you hold, and yes,
we do need to explore the facts (so called), and yes again, there is no
religion higher than truth. It's the regular theme of aspersion and
mockery based on second hand reports that weave in and out of your posts
that I am queerying. Are there any examples of noble qualities, accounts of
honesty and integrity, validations of Theosophy, of HPB, Judge and others
that you are seeking to substantiate through your research?
Regards
Peter
*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
>
> >David,
>
> >The more I relected on Jerry's and Rich's reply to your latest posts
> >the
> >more I realised that almost all the posts you make to this group
> >contain
> >reports of rumour and/or second hand slurs on people's character and
> >integrity.
> >What is the basis of your research? And how are you intending to use
> >t?
>
>
> Peter, to what are you referring?
> I've quoted from Dr Bruce Campbell's
> history of TS & wanted to know
> more about what he wrote on ULT. Is that such
> a crime? What is your own statement?
> A slur on my integrity & motivations?
>
> As I've stated several times on this forum,
> I'm interested in life of W Judge & intend
> writing dissertation--book on controversy surrounding
> his life. My interest in ULT stems from ULT's
> esteem & defense of W Judge's life & work.
>
> In looking thru my papers this morning,
> I see my question on ULT esoteric group
> was answered in letter from Mr John Copper
> I received last March! I'll post some of that
> soon.
>
> David
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 07:38:00 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id HAA10163 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:23:44 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Drpsionic@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 08:21:38 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 58
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 99-02-25 03:39:07 EST, you write:
<< Besides which, don't people have a right to associate how and where they
will?
In America freedom of assembly is a fundamental right of all citizens. I am
not a member of Pasadena's T.S., I don't claim to know their inner workings,
nor would it be any of my business. But if they had or have private study,
it's their right, good for them. I wish them well.
>>
Agreed. I fail to understand what all the fuss is about. Perhaps the
conspiracy theories that overrun the Adyar TS have spread now to encompass the
other Theosophical Societies as well.
Chuck
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 09:23:01 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id JAA20900 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:19:54 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990225091638.00d42784@mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:16:38 -0600
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: M K Ramadoss
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
In-Reply-To: <00a401be603d$40dab860$938306d4@g2l4g2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 10:30 PM 2/24/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>For those on the list who email me privately wondering if I attempt to hurt
>any persons or organizations I may point out that I am searching for truth.
>In the past I was critical too to other TS'ies as well and would have this
>questions as well if the matter would have been belong to any other
>organization. The motto runs not: There is no religion higher than the TS
>XXX" but "..than truth". That's all. Hope that helps to clarify my position
>as a theosophical student with interest in historical details. And my lesson
>was not to believe any labelings or namings, but to look was is behind it.
>An analogy may: Today some countries have the word "democratic" in their
>country names, but often they are far less democratic than other countries.
>
>Frank
Well said Frank. Each organizations has to stand on its own and when
questions arise, they should be answered in a logical and reasonable
manner. Anyone searching for truth need not be afraid of more light
especially in the present internet environment. But more often the general
trend seems to be that the "officials" instead of participating and
providing information they avoid internet discussion forums such as this. I
think much of it has to do with the ignorance or fix they are in as they do
not know how to deal with. Just the other day I read about a report how the
"hate" groups are now able to reach millions of potential candidates
through Internet. If they can do it, the "Truth" groups should also be able
to do it and the potential is enormous.
mkr
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 13:54:37 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id NAA21213 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:29:41 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id:
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 14:26:58 -0500
From: Gerald Schueler
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Theos-World Pasadena Has NO ES
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
//,Now, what are the facts? If the ES of Pasadena is not labeled ,as
"ES" but as "privately study group", then comes the question to my mind
if and why this policy is better for students than the old.
>>
Frank, please understand--the TS Pasadena has no, and needs no, ES.
There are NO priviate secret esoteric study groups.
>>In Point Loma times every member of the TS has had the right to enter
the ES (there was no fear of "invaders" - Rich's word) and learn the
teachings. This was the policy under G. de Purucker, as well as it was
under Judge, K. Tingley and HPB, and also under Helen Harris (after
GdeP's death). >>
You may find the latest publication from the American section (Alan
Donant) to be of interest. It looks and feels like a SUNRISE, but is all
about Col Conger and his wild ride at Leadership after de Purucker.
According to the above, when Col Conger took over he discovered that the
ES was an elitist group who wanted esoteric teachings while giving
nothing back. Now de Purucker was able to provide esoteric instruction.
The Col was not, and he admitted as much. In fact, no one of Purucker's
stature was available, and this led to a lot of bitching and in-fighting
from disgruntled members who wanted more teachings. After much arguing
and complaining from members, the Col (with Long's help) closed the ESs
and they have never reopened.
>>The ES has had an address and its existence was known to all.
Today a student seems not to have a right to know of the existence of
such a "private" group or were he can go. >>
I have never been in any ES, and likely never will. Nor do I feel
deprived at all. Pasadena does hold open study meetings which anyone can
attend, but there is no longer an ES as such nor does anyone at the HQ
offer to dole out new esoteric techings.
Jerry S.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 17:26:21 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA19248 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 16:58:57 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: "Peter Merriott"
To:
Subject: RE: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 22:57:48 -0000
Message-ID: <000101be6112$43b69f60$255995c1@et.u-net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <00a401be603d$40dab860$938306d4@g2l4g2>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Dear Frank,
You write:
> Today a student seems not to have a right to know of the
> existence of such a
> "private" group or were he can go.
> So I wonder if the "private group" of the Pasadena TS is studying the same
> texts which they have for the public or if they are studying the
> real texts.
I think you are quite right to raise the questions you have if the situation
was as you describe it. However, from the little I know of Rich, from his
postings to this group, I have no reason to doubt his word that there is no
such group.
What concerns me is that your valid questions and what comes across as a
sense of injustice arise in response to rumour. And I think that is one of
the things that is so damaging about rumour and gossip which gets passed on
from one place to the next - in no time at all it assumes the status of fact
and stirs up a lot of negativity in its path.
Best wishes
Peter
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Thu Feb 25 20:43:02 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id UAA11208 for theos-talk-outgoing; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:33:34 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
From: Richtay@aol.com
Message-ID:
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 21:18:03 EST
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 74
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
In a message dated 2/25/99 11:26:12 PM, Peter wrote:
<>
Exactly. We need think only of the attempt to destroy Mr. Judge last century
to assure ourselves of the truth of Peter's words. Even people who had
hitherto supported Mr. Judge, like Henry Olcott, turned on him in the face of
very flimsy evidence and suspicions as to his "occult" advancement. The same
thing as to HPB's character and sources.
Now scholars today who even begin to look at Theosophical teachings
immediately meet piles of damaging studies and testimony from enemies of
Theosophy; few ever dig down and see how much of it is groundless accusation
and hearsay which has taken on the status of fact.
Likewise, just in three days on this list, rumor has become fact and some
people feel hurt. What does Mr. Judge say about "those living messengers"
called words?
Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 01:38:17 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id BAA01706 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 01:32:22 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990226012909.010b99b4@mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 01:29:09 -0600
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: M K Ramadoss
Subject: Re: RE: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Well said, Rich.
When we start allegations against the pioneers who have sacrificed much for
the cause of theosophy, I just stop and consider what each one of us have
sacrificed for the "Cause".
It makes me humble and get on with what I can do to help our fellow beings.
Talk and criticism is cheap; action is what is needed.
...mkr
At 09:18 PM 2/25/1999 EST, you wrote:
>
>In a message dated 2/25/99 11:26:12 PM, Peter wrote:
>
><
>the things that is so damaging about rumour and gossip which gets passed on
>
>from one place to the next - in no time at all it assumes the status of fact
>
>and stirs up a lot of negativity in its path.>>
>
>Exactly. We need think only of the attempt to destroy Mr. Judge last century
>to assure ourselves of the truth of Peter's words. Even people who had
>hitherto supported Mr. Judge, like Henry Olcott, turned on him in the face of
>very flimsy evidence and suspicions as to his "occult" advancement. The same
>thing as to HPB's character and sources.
>
>Now scholars today who even begin to look at Theosophical teachings
>immediately meet piles of damaging studies and testimony from enemies of
>Theosophy; few ever dig down and see how much of it is groundless accusation
>and hearsay which has taken on the status of fact.
>
>Likewise, just in three days on this list, rumor has become fact and some
>people feel hurt. What does Mr. Judge say about "those living messengers"
>called words?
>
>
>Rich
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 16:10:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA08523 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 16:00:20 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <003b01be61d3$35b4fd00$a98306d4@g2l4g2>
From: "Frank Reitemeyer"
To:
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:14:40 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>I think you are quite right to raise the questions you have if the
situation
>was as you describe it. However, from the little I know of Rich, from his
>postings to this group, I have no reason to doubt his word that there is no
>such group.
Accepted. Remains the question why the books of G. de Purucker were so much
altered and if those who were/are responsible for that also study these
texts or if they use the original texts - this would be elitism and a gross
violations of the expressed wishes and orders of the authors who wants the
books be printed unaltered for the readers and even in cases were "errors"
been found allowed only additions in square brackets. Why do they do that?
Are there two classes of Theosophists which GdeP could no foreseen? Why has
a reader of today not the right to read the pure GdeP? Suppose this policy
would be followed by Wheaton with the texts of HPB?
Frank
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 16:22:31 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA09175 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 16:00:53 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <003c01be61d3$365cd5c0$a98306d4@g2l4g2>
From: "Frank Reitemeyer"
To:
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Has NO ES
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:46:16 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
The Donant article is biased and full of misconception and gives hardly a
true view of history. I have been told by a Pasadena official that this text
is actually to be "updated". Do you really believe the fairy tale of an
"elitist group"? It's quite upside down with the "serious internal esoteric
troubles" (Fn. 10 in: GdeP: In the Temple, PLP, p. xv).
The ES members were forced by the new leadership to break their pledges and
violate the theosophical principles for which the Point Loma tradition
stands for. This crisis was foreseen by GdeP and he wanted his pupils and
coworkers to remain true to the esoteric principles. And so they did and
were bullied by the new lead. George Cardinal LeGreos says: The destructors
of Theosophy.
But a strange thing happened: The old pupils and coworkers (in Germany and
the Netherlands around the half of the membership) which could not follow
the "new", false and selfish way didn't played the ostrichs and they keep on
with their duties and their works as now independent Point Loma groups,
scattered around the world without a central HQ (like the mason movement),
but true to the original programme and their teachers.
This serious esoteric crisis broke out in 1946 with the claim of Conger,
three months after he took office as TS leader, to hold the same occult
status as HPB and forced the members to accept him as new Outer Head of the
ES. When he closed the ES (with James Long as the real background force) in
1951 the ES was in its 77th year of existence and it was the 53rd year after
the ES was reunited in a heroic task by Katherine Tingley with the TS. The
end of the story is that Conger and Long had not all the success they wished
and the true theosophists are working up to present within the theosophical
movement, although disconnected with the exoteric body as it was until KT
came. Boris de Zirkoff declared in 1975 in an address to the Anniversary
Convention in NY: If there would be no ES exist, then the whole TS would be
nothing else as a lie.
Frank
>You may find the latest publication from the American section (Alan
>Donant) to be of interest. It looks and feels like a SUNRISE, but is all
>about Col Conger and his wild ride at Leadership after de Purucker.
>
>According to the above, when Col Conger took over he discovered that the
>ES was an elitist group who wanted esoteric teachings while giving
>nothing back. Now de Purucker was able to provide esoteric instruction.
>The Col was not, and he admitted as much. In fact, no one of Purucker's
>stature was available, and this led to a lot of bitching and in-fighting
>from disgruntled members who wanted more teachings. After much arguing
>and complaining from members, the Col (with Long's help) closed the ESs
>and they have never reopened.
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 16:25:59 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id QAA09586 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 16:01:26 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-ID: <003d01be61d3$374f7320$a98306d4@g2l4g2>
From: "Frank Reitemeyer"
To:
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:04:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Doss,
last October I was informed by a Pasadena official of the high occult status
of James Long and of the well doings of his actions against the old Point
Loma members. Since then I am searching for truth about the the break up
crisis of 1946-1951 at Covina and Pasadena.
Perhaps it is verboten, but I do. My hope is that both sides now will
attempt to open their archives and tell the Theosophists the truth and not
only the same old biased tales. I found that Conger appointed in 1946 Mr.
Hartley as his successor and that James Long, who wanted the post for
himself, tried to hypnotise Mr. Hartley, but he was able to withstand the
attacks. Later a meeting was held, joined by both. Hartley was in attempt to
tell why Conger appointed him as his successor and show the members a
document, but Long jumped up from his chair and began to hit Hartley.
Hartley declared that thi Cabinet meeting was not regular, they were only a
working group with no legal power.
The next day they met again (without Hartley and his staff) and Long
suddenly said: The new leader has taken office! So he was accepted as the
new leader of Pasadena TS in 1951! Hartley called a Cabinet of its own and
remained the conter-papal. History really repeats itsself.
Today there are younger generations of theos. students and I think they have
all the right to now what has happened.
Would be a good thing when BOTH SIDES would show all their documents so that
each one can come to his/her OWn conclusions. Would be a good thing too, if
the Point Loma side would decide to present the tape memories of Elsie
Benjamin (secr. of GdeP) about that crisis and what GdeP foretold about
that.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: M K Ramadoss
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Date: Thursday, February 25, 1999 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
>At 10:30 PM 2/24/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>>For those on the list who email me privately wondering if I attempt to
hurt
>>any persons or organizations I may point out that I am searching for
truth.
>>In the past I was critical too to other TS'ies as well and would have this
>>questions as well if the matter would have been belong to any other
>>organization. The motto runs not: There is no religion higher than the TS
>>XXX" but "..than truth". That's all. Hope that helps to clarify my
position
>>as a theosophical student with interest in historical details. And my
lesson
>>was not to believe any labelings or namings, but to look was is behind it.
>>An analogy may: Today some countries have the word "democratic" in their
>>country names, but often they are far less democratic than other
countries.
>>
>>Frank
>
>Well said Frank. Each organizations has to stand on its own and when
>questions arise, they should be answered in a logical and reasonable
>manner. Anyone searching for truth need not be afraid of more light
>especially in the present internet environment. But more often the general
>trend seems to be that the "officials" instead of participating and
>providing information they avoid internet discussion forums such as this. I
>think much of it has to do with the ignorance or fix they are in as they do
>not know how to deal with. Just the other day I read about a report how the
>"hate" groups are now able to reach millions of potential candidates
>through Internet. If they can do it, the "Truth" groups should also be able
>to do it and the potential is enormous.
>
>mkr
>
>
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 23:00:58 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id WAA24462 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:44:41 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990226224114.00697444@mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:41:14 -0600
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: M K Ramadoss
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Has NO ES
In-Reply-To: <003c01be61d3$365cd5c0$a98306d4@g2l4g2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 08:46 PM 2/26/1999 +0100, you wrote:
> Boris de Zirkoff declared in 1975 in an address to the Anniversary
>Convention in NY: If there would be no ES exist, then the whole TS would be
>nothing else as a lie.
>Frank
As a historical note, not related to Pasadena, in 1920s, Annie Besant shut
down the ES (Adyar). This continued for about a year. Then some of the then
active "leaders" went to her and told her that the ES members were unable
to police themselves and requested her to reopen the ES, which she did.
Many to this day do not agree with Boris; who of course is entitled to his
opinion just like every one of us.
mkr
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
From owner-theos-talk Fri Feb 26 23:11:39 1999
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) id WAA24942 for theos-talk-outgoing; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:50:09 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: pippin.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990226224701.00d6d610@mail.eden.com>
X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 22:47:01 -0600
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
From: M K Ramadoss
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES?
In-Reply-To: <003d01be61d3$374f7320$a98306d4@g2l4g2>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-theos-talk
Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
At 09:04 PM 2/26/1999 +0100, you wrote:
>Doss,
>last October I was informed by a Pasadena official of the high occult status
>of James Long and of the well doings of his actions against the old Point
>Loma members. Since then I am searching for truth about the the break up
>crisis of 1946-1951 at Covina and Pasadena.
>>>>>>>clip<<<<<<<
Frank:
Truth can stand on its own and it will. Hopefully, Internet would act as a
catalyst to throw light on the historical matters and it would be a win-win
situation.
In the USA, the Government itself is encouraging organizations to disclose
information on websites. I am in the process of getting a tax exempt status
for an organization and was pleasantly surprised by a question in the
application about the website address in addition to street address and
phone number.
mkr
-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.