Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00684)

Martin>Jerry S: how *does* it work?
	Impersonally as causation.  Good and evil, reward
and punishment, have nothing to do with it.  This is how we
human beings see it most of the time, but karma, like nature,
doesn't care about "sin" and dispensing rewards to human
beings who have been "good."  This is our own psychological
projection.

Yes, I'd agree on that. Leaves still the question:
what forces/consciousnesses/substances are involved in this causation?

> Let me ask you another question: how did your character you had at birth
come into existence? I don't think you believe in the 'tabula rasa' concept
of human character, do you?
	No, I don't.  Nor did Jung.  I agree with Jung that the psyche
pre-exists birth.  It is the conscious ego that is born and grows and
finally dies.

agreed, if you equate this ego with a ray from manas, or possibly
the manasic entity itself.

>So, isn't this character somehow a sum-total
>of experiences of previous lives?
	It could be, but it has to be more than that, and doesn't
need to be that at all.  It is not our character or personality that
reincarnates, but the skandhas or propensities.  Tendencies.

Right. But don't these skandhas build our character in current life,
together with environmental factors such as parents, etc.?


>  But since our past
life karma takes the form of genetics in this life, we can simply
look at our genetics and forget past lives to get the same effect.

Yes, we can forget past lives and look at our current physical-psychical-
mental structure. I wouldn't limit this structure to a genetic one, though.


Martin>And doesn't imply this a certain
>pattern for your life and an appropriate environment you're drawn to
>at the time of conception? Please elucidate what your opinion is on that .
	Yes.  I believe that we have a preview of our coming life
 just prior to entering the womb.  This is *not* with certainty, but rather
 a preview of likely possibilities.  Why is one person born to a certain
 family, if not karma?  Our past-life karma takes the form of genetics.

You include psychic structure in genetic structure? I suggest that there
are connections, but that there is something more than genetic structure
alone.


Jerry>We are enabled to do this by selecting our parents.  I am also certain
that we enter the womb at conception.

Yes, I think so too. Did you use clairvoyant observation to come to that
conclusion?

>How does the event of a baby being born from a heroine addicted mother
>fit in in your opinion of karma?

Jerry>	There is no hard and fast rule here.  Perhaps the desire
for physical expression overcomes the desire for quality?  Perhaps
there is a past bond between the incoming child and the mother?

   Yes, I think there is a past bond, otherwise there would not be an
 attraction to the parents to be.

Jerry>Of one thing I am certain: the "innocent victims" in this life
subconsciously accept their position as victims.  Modern psychology also
 agrees with this.

Well, I tend to agree with that point of view. Which subset of psychology
are you referring to? Transpersonal?


Martin>Some people say: 'roll of the dice', but that's a meaningless phrase
to me.
>Who is rolling this dice?
	
Jerry>You are.


Exactly. The reason why I asked is that I want to get to the core
of  people's opinions. It is part of the Socratic method, which I like
(and will practice in my summer-holiday at a school of philosophy ).
I intend to use it more and more on this board and probably at alt.theosophy
too when it gets busier there.

Jerry>  You agreed to the dice roll when you let yourself
be born.  "God's will," "karma," "past lives," "genetics," "luck," and "chaos"
are all attempts to explain the unfairness of life.  As Jimmy Carter once
said, "Nobody ever said that life was fair."

	Well, nobody complains when things go well. But when things turn out
different from expectations, then  the deep ingrained habit
of complaining wakes up and comes into action. Part of the human
psychological make-up.


Martin>IOW, which consciousnesses are at work here? There is much more
behind it, but it has never been thoroughly researched IMO.
And if it has been done
>none has ever been able to explain these processes clearly to me, if to any
>at all.
	

Jerry>The consciousnesses at work are all subsconscious--there
is constant telepathic communiation going on between every monad
in our human lifewave on Globe D.  Not in words, so much as ideas
and images.

Yes, I think so too.

Jerry> Every victim subconsciously agrees to be such.  Every
person on a doomed airplane, for example, subconsciously agrees
to it.

	Well, that's one way to see it. Another perspective may be that
 these persons have not learned to listen to their higher nature
(Guardian Angel) which will probably warn them, and thus cannot escape
from a kind of 'mechanical' type of karma if you understand what I mean.


Jerry>Death is but a part of life, and life is an intricate dance.

	It sure is.



>How or where did you get/find this essay? It looks interesting to me.
	Its in TEXTBOOK OF TRANSPERSONAL PSYCHIATRY
AND PSYCHOLOGY,  B.S. Scotton, A.B. Chinen, & J.R. Battista (eds).
New York: BasicBooks (a div of HarperCollins) 1996.


Thanks for giving me this reference, Jerry.


>> One
>>of the things that transpersonal psychology is doing is
>>helping these people to understand their experiences.
>>Why can't theosophy help?
>	
>Jerry: why don't you give us a start on that?
	I have done so, many times.  But the typical
	Theosophical attitude is to ignore it.  Even Eldon says
	that Kundalini should be left alone.  The problem is,
	a lot of people are having spontaneous Kundalini
	rousings.


Indeed. I've had some rousings myself and it took a while to find my balance
again. This rousings seem related to the transformation of inner structures
in the psyche, at least that's a part that I have observed.
Maybe Eldon means that it is not wise to fool around with Kundalini?
Kundalini is 'occult electricity', a life-force, potentially a very
strong force, I guess. But you know more about it, having practiced
Kundalini Yoga, don't you? What is this yoga all about? How does it work?




 Jerry>  In point of fact, I doubt that any
TS can help these people much anyway.  The danger
of ignoring Kundalini and the like, is that without
knowledge, you can't help others.  Today, transpersonal
psychology is doing more help than the TSs in this
area (i.e., in the new area of spiritual emergency).

Well, transpersonal psychologists probably have had
specific training to deal with 'disorders' like that. I wouldn't send
a person with that kind of problems to TSs anyway, only to a qualified
therapist.


> When I have some spare time for doing some reading on
>transpersonal psychology
>I will certainly do so. Some synthesis with theosophy seems
>appropriate  to me.

Jerry>	Check out some of Ken Wilber's material.  As Chuck says,
he is a bit dry and tedious at times, but the ideas that he presents
are building a bridge between Theosophy and psychology.

Thanks again for a reference. I will certainly check his material.


>Right. The 'signs of the time' tell us that we can't ignore NDE and other
>psychic experiences. Theosophists should do well to think this over and
>consider what theosophy can mean to people with this kind of experiences.

Jerry>	It has helped me, because by studying Theosophy, Magic, and
Occultism, I have built up a worldview that accommodates NDE, Kundalini,
and the like.  But you can't do this by ignoring topics that are relevant
to people nowdays.


Jerry: I agree with that 100%. The times have changed and the only way
theosophists will appeal to and  communicate to larger numbers of people
is to develop a view on these matters. We're slowly getting in the
Aquarius era and people are developing new powers now and have many
new experiences, not common before. In fact, unlike some suggestions
made on this board, I'm not a crystalized core-theosophist at all.
I've been studying and researching other paths as well and am still
doing that as a means to compare ideas, notions, concepts and practices.
I also know that there are organizations that are and have been busy
with the integration of Wisdom-Philosophy/Gnosis, etc. with science
and philosophy (non-Aristotelian semantics for example).
Actually, I expect some efforts of open-minded theosophists to modernize
and update Theosophy to current standards of knowledge.


Martin