From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 17:19:59 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Miscellaneous Jim Meier: Thanks a lot for a wonderful card and your words of encouragement! I donot have your postal address for mailing a card or letter and I am not sure how to find your e-mail address. Hope to hear from you some more soon! Jerry H. What can you tell me about Jeanine Miller and David Reigle (see the message below from Daniel)? I am very interested in 'networking' with anyone with the type of background that they have! Also I hope that you will be commenting soon on my previous message of November 12 which I re-sent to you yesterday. Brenda Tucker: Sometime ago you asked the question about what HPB had said regarding what came first : plants/animals or humans? In SD it says (as far as I can recall) that man appeared first (in the First Round) on earth, then came minerals, plants and animals! However, in this, our fourth Round, minerals, plants and animals were present (as a result of 'Karma' from previous rounds?) before man appeared. Hope this helps a little! Daniel: I went through the two papers that you sent me, one on SD III and the other one by Ray Morgan on Misleading Mayavic Ideations. Enjoyed reading both of them immensely. I have the following questions for you: a) What do you do these days? Are you into full time research on Blavatsky? What is the role or the Blavatsky Center with which you are associated? b) I'll be interested in getting a copy of the work by Cleathers on Alice Bailey (as you kindly offered in your message below). I'll pay you whatever the cost is. c) Did Ray Morgan write anything else after the one paper that you sent me? Especially the work he proposed to do on Bailey's writings? I find it most interesting that Ray Morgan's comments on Leadbeater and Besant mirror those made in Bailey's Unfinished Autobiography (which I had included in my last message of November 12, 1993--which apprently some persons did not receive). Also I find very interesting the quotation (on p.30 of Ray Morgan's paper) from Letter # 54 from KH (from the 'Mahatama Letters' I assume): "I dread the appearance in print of our philosophy as expounded by Mr. Hume. I read his three essays or chapters on God (?), ....... This is preposterously ridiculous; if he publishes what I read, I will have HPB or Djual Khool deny the whole thing..." The reference in the above by KH to DK (Djual Khool) is of interest because it establishes the 'fact' of DK being involved in the theosophical/'hierarchial' teaching right from the time of HPB. This corroborates what is stated by Bailey about HPB being her 'predecessor'. In Peace, Light and Love/Arvind > From: BLAVATSKY@delphi.com > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1993 23:05:45 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: Vol. III of the S.d. > To: exuaxk@exu.ericsson.se > > Sorry for not responding promptly and have not done internet for > several days. Vol. III of the S.D. is unfortuanately out of print. > And the Quest reprint of Vol. III under the title Esoteric Writings of > H.P. Blavatky is also out of print. Most of this material is to be > found in Vol. 14 of H.P.B.'s Collected Writings, published by Wheaton, > Illinois. You can probably obtain a copy of Esoteric Writings or > Collected Writings, Vol. 14 from Jerry. > > I haven't received your letter with money but will send the 2 articles > to you in the near future. > > I have been reading your interchange with Jerry and find it quite > (mispelled). > > Alice Cleather, a personal student of H.P.B, wrote a pamphlet in the > 1920s or 1930s, called (I believe) *The Pseudo-Occultism of Alice > Bailey*. It is probably available from the HPB Library in Canada. > Jerry or I could probably supply you with a photocopy of this > pamphlet. > > By the way, Jeanine Miller, A Theosophist with an expertise in the > Vedas, and David Reigle, a Theosophist with a wonderful knowledge of > Sankrit and Tibetan, are both serious students of Alice Bailey's > writings. Ask Jerry about their viewpoints. > > I will continue to read the interchange and at some point will give my > own point of view. > > I love internet and I love the Theosophical discussion group. > > Take care, > > Daniel > > Daniel Caldwell, The Blavatsky Information Center, P.O. Box 1844 > Tucson, arizona 85702 E-Mail: blavatsky@delphi.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 20:03:28 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: leadbeater again Jerry H-E & Sarah K: When we talk about Leadbeater, the type of person he was, the life that he led, the validity of his psychic powers, and his status in the Adyar T.S., we are just looking at the personality of one fellow among the ranks of theosophists. Leadbeater was a key figure in T.S. history, except for in 1906 when he was expelled and denounced by Annie Besant, but later reinstated and accepted back into the T.S. He wrote a large number of books, some assisted by Ernest Wood, his personal secretary, who, for instance, wrote portions of and assembled "Talks on the Path of Occultism" from lecture notes of his and of Annie Besant's. Not every aspect of his personal life was good by today's standards, and not everything that he claimed to see psychically held up as real. (He did not know, for instance, that one of his invisible helpers friends had died, and wrote him a letter.) His writings, though, are easier to read, and even if they lack the depth of Blavatsky's works, they can interest people in the philosophy. My personal experience is an example, I got into Theosophy through first reading his books. It is possible to make side-by-side quotes to show where he differs from Blavatsky. Such an approach, though, is subject to abuse, since someone's published views could change over time, and it might depend upon which quote was selected whether there was agreement or not. The best approach is to work on uncovering and presenting the major points of philosophy missing from what Leadbeater taught, and those that Leadbeater misunderstood. When he came to Theosophy, for instance, he first read the writings of Sinnett, and read that Mars and Mercury were part of the earth chain. H.P.B. plainly states in "The Secret Doctrine" that such an idea is wrong, but Leadbeater had read that they were part of the earth chain and thought he saw them as such, in his psychic explorations. It's a fact of the psychic senses that our expectations bias what we see, and a good portion of Leadbeater's materials are presentations based on his psychic experiences, rather than upon his *study of the philosophy*, and they therefore were subject to error. His books are mostly light reading, because they were written plainly, and not in the indirect manner in which the Mysteries were taught, as Purucker's were. When young, I found such books as "Invisible Helpers" fun to read, and believing that they described real, possible experiences, and I was stimulated to want to be psychic like Leadbeater was. It was only later, with further study in Theosophy, in reading books more in line with the original teachings as found in Blavatsky's works, that my interest in his books began to wane. As I came to see that what he wrote was not possible, in the theosophical scheme, but rather matched more closely the view of the Spiritualists, I lost interest in his books. There is some of the theosophical philosophy in Leadbeater's books, some mixed in with other elements that are not quite right. These other elements may attract people to study Theosophy who might not have otherwise noticed it. And like Alice Bailey, he refers readers to Blavatsky, so there is the possibility that readers will move on to more advanced works later. His writings could be considered as an introductory step to learning Theosophy. When I introduce people to Theosophy, there are a number of books by other authors that provide an excellent introduction. They do not contain the other material, the divergent views of Leadbeater's, so I prefer to recommend them to new people. I would not, though, tell someone who studies Leadbeater to stop doing so, to change over to other authors. I realize that the process of learning requires new ideas to arise *from within* and I cannot externally bring another to change his views. The best approach that I've found to dealing with others is to allow them their own views, to go as deeply into the philsophy as I can, and try to share what I've found to the extend that I'm able to do so. Others can read what they like, although for myself there's not enough hours in the day to read every book that may come my way. I know where my goldmine of study is, and leave it to the discrimination of others as to where and what they may mine for. As long as we go for the best that we can find, as we delve into the philosophy with an open mind and an eager intellect, as we try to truly give expression in our lives to the grand truths that we find, we are doing well. Let's find the best sources of study for our own purposes, and allow our fellows the right to do the same. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1993 20:58:56 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Chaos The Nine Laws of Chaos Magic, as I have outlined them in my essay (see Library) have many important ramifications as well as curious implications. For one thing, they imply that order rises up out of chaos and then drops back into it at some point in time, much like light is said to rise up out of darkness. The rising of order/light is creation, Brahma. Their re-submergence is destruction, Siva. Their play together is manifestation, Vishnu. This implies that chaos is as *real* as order. One of the gods of chaos was the ancient Egyptian god Set. He sported the head of an unknown animal, possibly a hyeana, but no-one is really sure today. He was called the Opposer, largely because he opposed the creative energies of his chief rival, Horus. In ancient Egypt, Horus ruled the North while Set ruled the South. Set was the god of the desert - the red land, while Horus ruled the fertile lands around the Nile - the black land. As an interesting aside, people born with red hair were said to be in the service of Set and were largely shunned by polite society. The god Set later became the Satan of Christianity, but in the early days of the Egyptian empire (a 6,000 year plus reign) he was considered a good god, and was the brother of Osiris. For example, he helps in the Opening of the Mouth ceremony, and in other Book of the Dead chapters. But by the middle kingdom Horus was considered good and Set was the evil Opposer. I think that this was heightened during the reign of Amenhotep IV, the king who tried to sell the people on one god, Aten, at the expense of all of the others. Aten, the solar disk or Light itself, was opposed by Darkness in the same way that Horus was traditionally opposed by Set. In fact, another name for Aten was Ra-Hor-Khuit (Re-Heru-Khuti) meaning Horus of the Two Horizons (or the Horus of Duality). All of this implies that the Egyptians were very aware that the dualistic manifestation of our universe is opposed by Chaos, just as light is opposed by darkness, consciousness by the unconscious, and so on. Our universe is not all light, goodness, perfection, and happiness. In fact, Buddha taught that the very core of our material universe was suffering. What does all of this mean to us today as we plod through life in the twilight years of the 20th century? It means that we cannot ignore Chaos, or what I have called the Chaos Factor. Chaos exists. Darkness exists. They are as real, at least, as their polar opposites. So no matter how much spiritual understanding we have, no matter how well we practice magic, and no matter how much we try to control our lives, chaos in one form or another is apt to jump up and bite us when we least expect it. This explains why stupid little things happen to us every day. We lose things. We hit our finger with a hammer. We fall down. We have accidents. We forget things. Etc, etc. Chaos, in its attempt to let us know of its existence and power, is ever nipping at our heels while we continue to pay all of our conscious attention to Order pretended (or possibly really believing) that chaos doesn't really exist (How could a loving God let evil exist in the world? is a very old question that has yet to be answered). My thesis about Chaos Magic is that we should not ignore Chaos, but rather accept it and use it. The point where Chaos strikes us during our everday life is an incident that I have called a Magic Point - a point in our lives where magic can help guide us in one direction or another. Many times it is not what happens to us that counts in our development, but how we react to an incident or event. We can learn to control our reactions. Chaos Magic suggests that by iteration (ie continuous concentration) on a thought, we can bring that thought into our experience. This is very much in line with the Japa and Mantra techniques of Eastern occultism. We can learn to recognise Magic Points, and use them to our advantage. This has nothing to do with sitting within a magic circle and waving a rod around, or burning incense, or speaking arcane languages. It is, I think, more like plain common sense, once you understand how Magic Points work and how Chaos can be iterated/bifercated through repetition or concentration. It is a case of "tipping the scales" in the right direction just at the proper time to allow us to achieve a desired result at some point in the future. A Magic Point is like a point in time where our future can branch off in two or more directions. By using techniques of Chaos Magic, we can help direct these flow of events in our favor. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 01:03:18 -0500 From: Donald DeGracia <72662.1335@compuserve.com> Subject: To John mostly John: Could you elaborate on this? My mathematician friend at times speaks of similar things. he says that you can define spaces mathematically that have no properties at all, and define things that are completely abstract and have no counterpart whatsoever in physical experince. I wonder if you guys might be on the same line of thought. <... describing the difference between the physical plane and the lesser planes> Could you elaborate on this some more too? Its my impression that the physical plane is a *subset* of the mental plane (in spite of extremely stong opinions to the contrary that I've gotten on the science forum in Compuserve.) I don't know if its fair to call chaos theory "classical". One only iterated an equation in classical physics for the purpose of approximation. Iteration, as you know, is a basic feature of chaos. This fact alone seems to put them in different catagories of mathematical description in my mind (i.e. classical physics verses chaos theory). What do you think about this? Regarding the nondeterminism that *seems* to be present in QM, I still am hesitant to buy into the idea that nondeterminism is a cornerstone concept. May it be that this whole idea of deterministic verses nodeterministic frameworks is too simple a dichotomy to paint, or perhaps there is an alternative model that will subsume both models? And again, I will stress that it is very hard for me to accept the dialogue of modern physics as it stands. there are too many historical, sociological and psychological factors that are being completely ignored for me to buy into the speculations that come from contrasting classical physics and QM in a relative intellectual vacuum. I mean, there is not even a working model of how the human mind work in these types of dialogues, though such models are implied in the various viewpoints. Still, I would caution about being too presumptuous in our contentions about things. Tentativeness is a blessing in this regard. To Gerald Schueler: Jerry, would you mind if I ran a chart on you? Could you get me your birthdata? I'm curious to see how an assesment of your birthchart illuminates your thoughts. Best to all! Don From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 11:09:03 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: chaos and laws of nature The field of chaos, and more particularly an approach like Chaos Magic, has the potential of becoming another possible religion for the west. It could be wrapped up into a package that could form an entire belief system in its own right. It has a way of explaining life, and how it originates. There are higher powers controlling life (attractors) and a metaphysical realm that directs outer life (phase space). There is the polarity of creative and destructive forces, of chaos and cosmos, with both considered good in the proper balance and tension. We have a mystical connectin between man and the universe, and a philosophy that gives us a sense of power over life, even when there is so much that is beyond our control. We learn of magic points, places in space and time where the butterfly effect may happen, where there is sensitive dependence on initial conditions, where we can have hope that what we do can influence all of life, even if we do not see any immediate effects. There is a mathematical symbol of the archetypal world, where objects are linear, behave according to classical physicals, and take on well-defined, smooth shapes like the platonic solids. And we see how as life in these objects quickens, as their activity intensifies and they enter turbulance, that hierarchy is created. As their surfaces take on a fractal nature, then a hierarchy of infinite depths, of countless levels, has been created. We could say that such a state represents the entering into manifestation, when a being's manifest form comes into existance as the organizing life that gathers together lessor beings and creates for them the world in which they live. And they likewise create the worlds for still lessor beings. And so on, further and further, lower and lower, with no end to how low the worlds can be. There is also a description of the process of life, clothed in mathematical terms, as a process of feedback and interation. And we are provided with a philosophy that allows us to appreciate everything that we see as living, as an example of life, as systems subject to the process of life. We must not, though, in our own study of the subject, wrap it up together too tightly, or we will end up with a self-sufficient, closed system of thought that will explain everything, *but at the same time exclude a lot.* Like Jungian Psychology, that neatly wraps everything up in a psychocentric basis, where everything is understood and explained from the point of view of the human personality, we could find ourselves locked in a system that resolves everything to math and physics. A system of thought may have a word about something, an opinion on a each and every thing, an explanation of anything that we might observer or encounter in life. It might have something to tell us on almost everything. But that does not mean that its perspective is a good one to take all the time. A closed system, where everything is neatly explained to us, leads to mental rigidity, and the loss of the higher faculity of thought. We must watch out for closed systems of thought, even in our theosophical studies, and not settle for things that appear to be too nicely explained, too complete a system, too easy a picture of life. When what we are reading becomes too easy and obvious, we're either reading the wrong books--wrong for us--or we've somehow gotten off track and lost the inspiriation of our inner teacher. There's a body of knowledge in mathematics, physics, and the other physical sciences that could be studied for a lifetime and not be exhausted. We could go into a library and find thousands of disciplines that could also each provide a lifetime of learning to us. This learning is good, it is good to develop the intellect, but we must also set aside time for the spiritual side of life, time to explore the Mysteries. The Mysteries are *not* just another body of ideas that take on value by making a cross-discipline study. They are not just a simple set of metaphysical ideas and psychically-derived tidbits of facts of nature, beyond what science has yet come to. Their primary, their greatest value is not from drawing analogies between them and other disciplines. The Mysteries are *known* in a different way, using other faculties in addition to the intellect, important as it is. The study of the field of chaos, which includes nonlinear dynamics and mathematical models of complexity, do, though, provide us with some new keys to understanding life. We are provided with additional examples or illustrations of concepts that we've studied in Theosophy. One example is that of hierarchy and manifestation, illustrated by the the onset of turbulence and when boundaries take on a fractal nature. We are also provided with symbols that point to truths that are not plainly stated in our literature, symbols that hint at something that we've not been clearly told. An example would be what is revealed of the law of cycles, as we look at the bifurcation curve. It is important, though, to not take analogies too far, and to always apply to our ideas certain reality checks. The ideas must *ring true.* They must be in accord with the other Teachings and bear certain characteristic signs that would reveal that they are special in a certain way. Regardless of their apparent complexity, on the surface, there should be a certain simplicity to them, a certain beauty of form, a certain harmony in thought to them. And they should tie back to our spiritual natures, affecting us, brightening our perceptions, uplifting our experiences of life. This new, possible religion of Chaos Magic, appeals to the interest in science in the west. As a religion it would be a belief system that has a cosmogenesis--how the world comes into being--a superphysical order and structure to things that has the flavor of the Chinese tao, an order based upon universal law rather that creative intelligences. We are still left with a mechanical universe, though, since ultimately the laws of nature rule. The laws are now more complex, creative, but considered as abstract forces in a pure mathematical sense. In theosophical literature we read of the laws of nature as *not* being mechanical of whatever sort. They are not abstract but miraculous directing powers in nature. (Miraculous in the sense of themselves not being subject to laws.) The behavior of the physical works is not mechanical, deterministic, not a slave to external laws, even be they nonlinear and subject to feedback, with models of action that include bifurcations and all the diversity to be found in models of turbulence. The mental picture of order arising spontaneously out of the richness of chaos is good, a colorful metaphysical image, a nice way to think of things, but it is still *an analogy* based upon one mathematical way of describing things. Life is not *subject to* mechanical processes of the physical world, but rather *chooses to subject itself to* some laws, to pattern itself in some way, to associate itself with certain greater beings. But at a future time, the same life may associate itself with other great beings, and then it would *appear* that different laws of nature were in effect. The "laws" haven't changed, rather the being has allied itself with, has choosen to manifest or give expression to, the affects of different great beings. The behavior of physical matter is itself by choice. At different times, on different worlds, on different planes, matter can be observed *to behave* differently, to be subject to different "laws". This is not because the laws rule the matter, but because the matter has allied itself with particular great beings whose affects are those apparent laws. When a seashell has grown according to a spiral shape, it has adopted or borrowed from or subjected itself to the corresponding mathematics of a spiral. There is not an abstract sense of spiralness imposed upon it from without. There are not mechanical forces in nature. All is alive, the expression of beings on some level, and there is no dead, liefless, rigid, material mechanism running the universe, even at its highest levels, in the form of rigid mathematical rules. When we see certain mathematics at play in our physical world, it is because the world or its beings subject themselves to those mathematics. The processes of nature are by living tings *being* a certain way, by how they manifest, and not an external, rigid, mechanical application of laws over which nothing has any say. The field of chaos has much to offer us, many ideas that can enrich our study of Theosophy. And by bringing theosophical ideas to it, we may help formulate another system of thought that may benefit people, uplifting them and helping them live a more open, aware, spiritual life. But we should take care that we don't let any subtle biases creep into our theosophical thinking from its study, that we carefully distinguish the real from the mayavic in its outlook. In reading on the subject of chaos, I've found much to think about, and have come to feel that it is a valuable supplement to the study of Theosophy. It does not give the complete picture, and as in any study there is the danger of the crystalization of thought, of getting trapped in molds of mind, but it does have many unique gems of Truth that are worth going after. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1993 19:48:14 -0500 From: Andrew Rooke Subject: Forthcoming Syzygy of the planets Speaking with a friend recently she told me that she had read that there is to be a Syzygy of several planets in the solar system early next year (Syzygy = when several of the planets line up). Apparently there was such an event in the early 1960s and this was alluded to by another correspondent to the list recently. Our discussion turned to the significance of such an event in that it may signify the birth of a teacher and the commencement of his/her teaching in the world. Has anybody else heard of this event? What do others think about this possibly great influence on the thought life of our planet next year (if indeed the report on the occurence of this event is correct)? With good wishes for the sacred season to all from Companions in Australia, Andrew Rooke From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 10:59:49 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: childhood This is to Jerry S from Nancy I support that statement fully -- we are condemned to repeat unconsciously that which we don't get conscious of. This is why astrology has been so helpful to me, I get clues from it that only an expensive therapist might have also seen. Wasn't it Jung who said that we don't solve problems as much as outgrow them? Also, that the duty of the child is to resolve all the crap that their parents' didn't deal with. The more aware I can get of my own stuff, the less chance I will pass my garbage down to my kid. This information really motivated me to start dealing with my depressions in a deeper way. Fascinating stuff isn't it? Nancy From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 11:03:06 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: leadbeater again This is to Eldon from Nancy. Unlike you, my husband read a Leadbeater book and dismissed theosophy for years, believeing that Leadbeater was representative. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1993 12:33:22 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: responsibility to the Teachings When we come to study and teach Theosophy, we are faced with difficult choices. We are faced with the choice of how to handle attacks on the philsophy and on its Teachers. We are faced with misunderstood Teachings. And we are faced with the erronous but sincere views of others who claim to be presenting estoeric teachings. What responsibility do we have to stand up for Theosophy? We hear of the many ideas from other groups, with their make-believe worldviews. Some of them contain a degree of the philosophy. There are other things taught as well, things that either represent different cosmologies or, much worse, things taught that mislead the student in his life. It is far worse to teach an approach to life that leads away from his heart, from his inner spiritual nature, than merely to teach an erronous description of how our world was formed, and the inner workings of nature. We can to into a bookstore, and go to the metaphysical section, and find all sorts of stories of invisible worlds, of beings and their interaction with us, of stories of our role in the scheme of things. We can read many different, conflicting teachings regarding how we'll attain perfection and the process of doing so. In our lives, we meet people reading and learning all these different philosophies. Should we corect people, or leave them to their beliefs? Should we disagree, should we pretend agreement but add a thought or two in a "what if" manner, or should we keep silent? What should our role be in preserving and protecting the treasure of teachings that we have been priviledged to have received? We are told that we have a responsibility to pass on what we have heard in a pure form, but what do we say, and to whom? Do we associate with people with erronous views? We have been told that false but sincerely held beliefs is the greatest barrier to the Masters, much greater a barrier than physical grossness, even of drinking. Is that barrier something we must help others remove, or could it be a protective caccoon, a safe place for them to hide until they are ready to emerge into the light? Part of our responsibility is to defend others when attached, and to defend the philosophy. And this is not in the sense of, like a little child, getting into a "I'm right, you're not" sort of shouting match. We sincerely, with our greatest attempt at clarity, seek to express the Teachings that were misunderstood. We give out as much as is appropriate and possible for the situation, and leave the other to accept what he may. We should never react out of personal affront, out of personal anger, out of a sense of defending ourselves. Another aspect of our responsibility is to give clear expression to the philosophy, in a discussion, when we have some thoughts that would clearly be of benefit to the others. We must not keep silent, and hold back, when we are capable of sharing. We must see that the gift we have been, that of a special understanding of life, is not wasted, but is rather put to its fullest use, in being freely shared to the benefit of all. A third aspect of our responsibility is to the very deepest insights that we have ascended to in our inmost searching. We must communicate these, too, in some form. Even this cannot be completely held within. We should seek out others to share our thoughts with, or find some activity in life that can express them. To hold back, even at the deepest levels, and not share these understandings, is to lose them, to lose contact with their source. But this sharing must be handled carefully, since we are dealing with Treasures, we are dealing with Truths that are meant to be kept secret. How do we share them, yet keep them secret? One way is to have an advanced study class, since therein we can share, communicate, and express what we've found with a minimal chance of misunderstanding. We can be stimulated to go even deeper, in our studies, by attending and participating in the right class. But yet there are still deeper Truths that go beyond what we can discuss in a class. Looking at the Teachings, we see that they cover a whole spectrum of knowledge, from the most simple to the profoundly esoteric. The simple philosophy, on the one end of the spectrum, contains ethics, kind thoughts, simple truths about the loving nature of the world we live in, Truths that we can tell even our children, Truths that are of benefit to everyone we meet in life. At the other end of the spectrum, we find profoundly esoteric Truths, technical teachings that we can share with but a few, or can only dwell on in solitude. The Esoteric Philosophy contains knowledge that goes from the plain and simple to knowledge that is too deep for words, knowledge that can only be communicated by symbol and glyph, from those who know to those who would learn, an oral tradition. If we were to undertake a study of mathematics, we would read books, study with fellow students of mathematics, and learn from greater ones, students whom have advanced to being professors and researchers. We would study what they pass on to us, try the lessons they give, and there would be a transmission of knowledge. The learning process is one of mental training, of study, of association with those who know, who act as teachers to us. It is not one of paranormal visions. We do not go to a medium to get the words of a disembodied spirit to explain differential equations to us. The psychic vision is of no use to the process of learning, to the process of cultivating the mind, to the process of learning to heed the voice of the inner teacher. We go to those whom know to be taught. And we participate in the transmission of the Teachings. We are a link in the living chain of knowledge, rising from Teacher to yet greater Teacher, to the very core of manifest life. And we are responsible to see that the knowledge that we have been given is passed on to others, that we continue the link and see that those trailing behind us can share in what we have been given. In our sharing of what we know, we must take care in how we present things to the general public. We do not want to draw too much public attention, since the world is not ready yet for the deeper Truths. We can work the simpler Truths into our regular creative activities. (An example might be the fiction of James Joyce, a Theosophist who knew H.P.B., allowing something of Thesophy to work its way into his writings.) Our ideas would be disguised, and assimilated into popular culture. The more advanced ideas, the Teachings in their pure form, though, are for the thousands, not for the millions, and we cannot expect most people to go for them. This is not to say that the people are bad or lacking in any manner. They can be very good friends of ours, kind, noble people, who are simply not ready yet. Being ready for the Path, though, does not mean that we have flawless personalities. The time comes for us because of a ripening, an opening up, a centering of our consciousness in the heart of our being. And when we say *heart,* we do not mean the physical organ, the heart chakra, the seat of feelings and emotions. We refer to the other meaning of heart, the inmost nature, the central part, the core of our being. It is this heart that the spiritual literature of the world refers to. For all but a chosen few, this life that we lead is fine. Those who are looking for more may have been discouraged in life from some personal tragedy, but this is not the sort of searching that will lead to the Path. We are not unhappy with one form of personal existence and now seeking another. We are, rather, unhappy with personal existence itself, and feel a divine discontent. We seek something greater than just existing in and as human personalities. We feel the call of a grander scheme of existence, and are seeking to engage the process of self-perfection that will lead us to our goal. And this process is called the Path. There is something more than just being a human being, a human personality as we know it, and we want it. And this is not mere extension to the powers of physical existence. It is not other senses or control over physical nature. It is not a strengthening of the personality, giving us paranormal powers and the physical strength of dinosars. It is a higher form of consciousness, *in addition to* what we currently are, an entirely new aspect to life that we currently do not have, but deeply miss. There are forms of awareness, of appreciation and experience of life that are entirely missing in our lives, to which as rich a variety of experience can be had, as we have through our minds. Consider the complexity and diversity of thought required to live our lives. Consider what can be found in a library! Consider how much of our physical existence is governed by what goes on in our minds, apart from any physical thing that we may be doing. Then consider that an equally rich variety of experience awaits us, in an entirely different way of experiencing things, a whole other way of living life that also operates at its own level, also apart from our actual physical activities. And even in addition to the *new faculties of consciousness*, we have vastly deeper levels of development awaiting us in faculties that we already have. We've started to develope the mind in the human kingdom, to make it a self-conscious part of our lives. But its development *does not stop* with humanity. There is wisdom and understanding beyond imagine awaiting us in the distant future! Coming back to our reponsibility to the Teachings, we have a dual duty to defend them, and share them as we can. In sharing them, they may influence our personal contribution to the world, in whatever way that our talents lie. Since they come out disguised, blended in with our activities, they may take on any personal form that we may give to them. The direct sharing, though, of the Mystery Teachings, are only with the chosen few. The deepest things that we know are not meant to be given to any and all that we meet. We are told to know, to dare, to will, and to keep silent. And there are few to whom we may break the silence with. But we must find them, and share with them too, or we will suffer and our inner progress with come to a stop, and stagnate. There are certain things that we can only talk about with others at a similar stage of training. Classes are helpful, or even estoeric groups, with controlled attendance. Skeptics can disrupt the thought atmosphere and destroy the spiritual presence in a gathering, and uprepared students cannot follow what is going on, they miss too much. There are others, too, whom would not benefit from coming, the true believers type of people. They accept a form of belief as a follower, without really understanding it, but profess a belief and pay lip service to it. Someone may have latched onto Theosophy as an exoteric belief system, but could as well have chosen to believe almost anything else as well. This person would be non-functional in higher thought, and would just miss out on what is going on in the class. He may think that the others there are too narrow or arbitrary in their views, because he does not see *how* they are thinking, but only hears them express certain ideas, ideas for which he does not himself see the reasons for. He does not follow their lines of thought, being not attune to the theosophical thought current, and cannot really participate in what is going on. This higher form of thought, which is a very special, rare gift--if anything can be called a gift, knowing the law of karma!--is alike to love. If you've experienced it, you know what it is, and there is no mistake about it. But if you haven't, it's all speculation and seems so very unreal! There is yet another way that we carry on our responsibility to the Teachings. We are to pass on what we know, in appropriate times, appropriate places, appropriate ways to others. But this includes passing them on to ourselves too! We hold the Teachings at the back of our minds, during the activities of the day, letting them illuminate our lives even when we are not directly at their study. We hear of a state of learning, of knowing, of thinking where there is a radiant mind. And the world does transform and become for us a different place. It is as though we are on another plane of existence, although still here, in physical bodies, still doing physical activites. But this is because our consciousness has changed, we have changed ourselves, and not from outer, physical changes to our bodies or to the world about us. We have grown in the strength of our inner nature and of our power to affect the inner natures of others. This growth in not in terms of matter, in terms of the power to produce physical phenomena. We are on the path of spirit, not that of matter. Our ultimate goal is to become an impersonal force for good in the world, with no direct physical presence on this plane, but that lies off in the far distant future. We learn to live, to become, to radiate the highest virtues, of truth, beauty, love, wisdom, and become philosopher-saints, where our inner natures are illuminated and illuminate others. We do not become towering giants of physical and psychical powers, the embodiment of brute physical force. The highest in the world, the most spiritual, the most holy, the most lofty, but one step removed from non-existence, does not directly manifest itself on our earth. It must work through many grades of intermediate beings, each grade receiving the light from above, and passing it on the the next lower one. And it reaches its bottom, its farthest reach in the material world, at this, our physical plane, as we find it here on Globe D earth. When we rise beyond the need to exist here, when we become an impersonal force for good here, on this earth, with no direct physical presence, then we've really found our home on the next level, on the next globe or plane, where we they find our embodied existence. We've moved up one rung in the ladder of light, still holding our our hands to those behind us, and carry on the work of the uplifting of the world, of the saving of all of life, of the bringing unto enlightenment of all that lives! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1993 09:31:01 -0500 From: "Louise C. Mead" Subject: Re: Forthcoming Syzygy of the planets You're looking for events and you're missing the pattern! The main alignment in 94 is the continuing play of uranus and neptune in capricorn, one conjunction in 93, and two in 94, and a Jupiter Pluto alignment on Dec 2 94. Pluto Jupiter happens every 12 years or so. Uranus and Neptune every 150 years or so this one is worth study. The other event of intrest is Pluto inside Neptune every 248 years or so; George Washington was born during the last one. Two periods ago America was discovered. Three periods the Renaissance. Eight periods the birth of Christ. Six periods Mohamid. This is a time of world change. Look for patterns. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1993 18:28:39 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Leadbeater, Bailey. Eldon O.K., since we are going to talk about C.W. Leadbeater, we need to get the history straight. Though there are many who feel that Theosophical history should not be discussed, I believe it is better to have the facts available than to allow misinformation and dis-information to circulate, because I believe wrong information is more damaging to the Theosophical Movement than unpleasant truths. In the case you raised, my experience is that correct information has not been encouraged by many who seek to defend him. First of all, Leadbeater was never denounced and expelled from the Theosophical Society by Annie Besant. When the charges were brought against him in 1906 by the American Section, they wished to expel him, but were unable to do so because he was a member of the British Section. So Colonel Olcott called a hearing in London where Leadbeater was to defend himself against the charges. Leadbeater attended the hearing but also tendered his resignation to Olcott in advance of the hearing. The Committee, who reviewed the charges and heard Leadbeater's confessions, were deeply shocked and realized that Mr. Leadbeater's actions extended beyond the original accusations of advising children to practice "self abuse" as an occult practice, and to keep this advice a secret from their parents. In light of the fact that Mr. Leadbeater was an international lecturer and held in high esteem by the membership, the committee was put into a very difficult position. Though Mr. Leadbeater had already tendered his resignation, it made no reference to the charges against him. If the Committee was to issue an official expulsion, it would specify the charges for which they found him guilty and become a public document. The Committee felt that this action would bring scandal unto the Theosophical Society. Therefore, after extensive deliberation, they finally decided that the best course to take in order to protect the Theosophical Society was just to consent to accept his resignation, and not to make the reasons public. Col. Olcott was President at the time, presided over this Committee and made the final decisions under their advisement. Annie Besant was not on the Committee, and in fact was never even issued an official notice of the Committee's decision. Besant continued her friendship with Leadbeater, and continued her faith in his veracity. She made a public statement in the October 1908 issue of THE THEOSOPHIST of her intention to continue working with him. Regarding the charges against Leadbeater, she only acknowledged that he "advised self abuse" to some boys. She never acknowledged an awareness of the deeper charges against him. She announced that Leadbeater had promised to cease giving this advice, so for Besant, the matter was closed. What went on between Besant and Leadbeater from 1906 to 1908 to bring Besant to the position she took, is one of those mysteries. An answer to this question might be in the Correspondence between Besant and Leadbeater, but these letters are E.S. property and have never been made available. Though Leadbeater became a major figure in the E.S., I have not seen any documentation that he was ever reinstated into the T.S. Regarding the validity of Leadbeater's books, I think that is something people have to figure out for themselves. Several studies have been done comparing Leadbeater's teachings with Blavatsky's. The most available study is Ray Morgan's book obtainable from Dan Caldwell. All of these studies show that Leadbeater and Blavatsky's teachings conflict. One study even shows Leadbeater conflicting with himself. But what does all of this mean? Different people have different answers to this question. To give you an example: I will never forget the evening when a prominent T.S. member informed me that he had read *everything* that Blavatsky and Leadbeater had ever written, and *never* found a single conflict between them. The scariest part was that I think he actually believed what he said. But his ignorance on even the most basic ideas of Blavatsky, made it obvious that if through some miracle he had read everything, he wasn't paying attention. I have learned however, that after grand pronouncements such as that one, the best answer is silence. Daniel Received the material and will comment directly to you a little later. Arvind Thanks for resending your Nov. 12th reply. I never saw it. First of all, regarding letter # 54. The issue was over a manuscript that A.O. Hume was writing on "God," for which letter # 10 pertains to. K.H. was miffed because Hume was distorting his teachings regarding "God," and making him an agnostic. K.H. wanted to make it clear that his teaching that God does *not* exist is based upon *knowledge*, not belief. Hume could not accept K.H.'s position and wanted to represent K.H. as not knowing. Therefore to prevent a distortion of his teachings, K.H. threatened to have H.P.B. or D.K. who were both chelas, speak out against Hume's mss if it became published. I don't see how this passage "establishes the `fact' of DK being involved in the theosophical/`hierarchical' teaching right from the time of HPB", any more than, say Sinnett, or anyone else doing theosophical work in association with K.H. Please enlighten me. Returning to your communication of Nov. 12th. You say that you are having difficulty finding the reference because your edition of THE SECRET DOCTRINE is not the same as AAB's. As I recall, from my earlier investigations, I had determined that AAB had used the three volume Adyar edition of THE SECRET DOCTRINE, that contains Besant's 10,000 changes I mentioned earlier. I believe that I have a cross index somewhere between this and the original edition. When I find it, I will make a copy for you, If I can get your address. Otherwise, just let me know the reference in Bailey's edition, because I have a copy of this one also. Other than the above, I don't see anything else to comment on from your Nov. 12th communication. You seem to have answered everything completely, and for the time being, I think I pretty well understand where you are coming from. I think our next step after finding that lost quote, is to begin a comparison between Blavatsky and Bailey (and perhaps Leadbeater and Besant too if they fit into this). Regarding my use of the word "scholarship." I hope that doesn't scare anyone. Everyone is capable of scholarship, and it takes no special exclusive training--it is simply a matter of striving for accuracy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 09:50:38 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the Auric Egg Above and beyond Atman, beyond the seven manifest principles of consciousness, we are told of three more, of three unmanifest principles. Since they do not *exist,* they are more difficult to think about and understand. Principle number eight, the one immediately above, and brooding over Atman, is the Auric Egg. It contains the karmic seeds or the residual of experience. It carries over experiences from the distant, unknowable past, streatching back even into previous mahamanvantaras. The Auric Egg is the sum total of our personal evolution. It is very time-oriented, changing at every split instance of time. It is that part of us which does not exist, but overshadows existence, that records, that responds to, that takes in every event of our lives. The Auric Egg holds the repository of our experience. It is not a manifest principle, it does not partake of the nature of the world. It is untouched by the outer events, except for their essence, the lessons that have been learned in them, the highest parts of the experiences that have been *raised up* into and made a part of it. Brilliant, luminous, but not visible, it does not occupy space or position, but still broods over that area in space where we live and have our existence. It is everywhere, but still somehow more concentrated about our bodies and the areas where we live our daily lives. The experiences that are incorporated into it are the effects of our current karma, effects destined for expression in future lifetimes. It contains the totality of us, as we have made ourselves, at this very moment in time. It is the storehouse of the essence of self- consciousness. The Auric Egg is also the experience of pure nirvana, untouched by even the flavor of existence in any world. It is above the sense of individual self (Manas), the co-creation of existence (Buddhi), and of pure being (Atman). It is not *being*, because it is unmanifest, in it we do not exist; it is a state of *non-being*, for there is nothing to *be*, noone to experience being anything. It could be described as absolute silence, blackness, but at the same time be called utter fulfillment too, and perfect bliss. It is the "other shore," the other side of the Great Divide, the ultimate reward for being or existing in life. It is what is left of us, what we are, at this moment, when we are *nothing at all.* It is, in one sense, sunyata, the void, the emptiness behind life. It is also an assemblage of dynamic potential, awaiting an opportunity at actualization. We have a sense of duration, because of the affect of the other Monads in our constitution, above and below the Human Monad, and because of the seven lowest sub-principles of the Auric Egg. The sub-principles reflect the sense of manifest existence, but are only a thin film, a veil, a taste of such, and not the real, actual experience. The self of the manifest world, for the moment, has been annihilated. It is gone. No more do we say "I am this," or say "I am," or even say "I," but we can only say "this," and even that word is not right, because we are and we have no thing, no object to call by that word. There is just a pure sense of "now," a sense that things go on, that live lives and moves, but no active participation in it. In one sense, this plane or principle is the consciousness of time, the principle of pure duration. The Human Monad returns to this state, in the bosum of the Spiritual Monad--itself still manifest--in the after-death state of devachan. But the experience of the unmanifest is not just an after-death experience. It is also a principle of consciousness and an integral part of the experience of life. We may be unaware of it, but it is here, at this time, a part of ourselves, and is never gone. We have only forgotten it, or turned our backs on it. The experience of consciousness in the Auric Egg is the great reward that we may someday hope to step into. It is a real part of us, an element of our totality of consciousness, and not an aspect of the Unknowable itself. It is not touched by existance, but is above, behind it. It is everywhere but nowhere, the pure essence of self, the monadic essence, and stands apart from any coming of us into being, into manifestation. This principle is like a personal god, in one sense, overshadowing us, our creator, our ultimate source of union. It sees us everywhere, and knows all about us, because all we do and become enters into it. In its physical form, something like the human aura could stand as a symbol. There are no colors to it, though, nothing at all about it that has to do with manifestation. Consider it as a fullness of space, with various, ever-changing contents, but not like a sharply defined egg of light. Perhaps a better symbol would be a radiant orb with light that dims with distance but without end to its reach. To us, the Human Monads, it is our Inner God. Our Divine Monad has its seat therein. It is the very highest, best, most spiritual that we have become and is itself only rooted in the timeless, our eternal, unchanging root nature. Picture it as the darkness of chaos, brooding over the waters of cosmos. Out of it arise the manifest order of cosmos, our manifest existences. When we look upwards towards the divine, the truly transcendent, and feel touched by it, it is this part of us that we've experienced. In it is contained the sweetest sense of perfection, of completion, of union with the beloved, that we could ever experience. It is not pure *being,* but beyond that. It is pure essence, the monadic essence. It contains the experience of the absolute silence of extinction, but also of utter fullness. We could call it nirvana. It is higher than personal bliss, though, which comes from the freedom from the burden of the sense of having a personal self, freedom from Manas or Kama-Manas. It contains an end to being, to existence, but not to consciousness. We still have self-consciousness, strange as it may sound, but not of a form that we'd know as such, because it would be so high, so holy, of so divine a nature. We can and should strive to make this consciousness a part of our lives. It can uplift and infill us. It can root us in the purpose and meaning of life. And it can one day become such a part of the very fabric of our being that we too will have become gods ourselves, that we too will be not just workers in the Plan, but divinities ourselves! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 11:05:23 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: comments to JHE Jerry H-E: Thanks for your corrections regarding Leadbeater's relationship with Besant in the 1906-1908 period, and the actual situation regarding Leadbeater's expulsion. It's good to have someone with your fairly thorough understanding of theosophical history to review and correct things. When I'm sitting down to write for "theos-l", I'm often at work, armed with my memory, but with no reference books to consult, and therefore, at times, prone to err on historic details. It's good how with the internet discussion group we can write something, then get almost-immediate comments and feedback on our ideas, and get quick corrections on factual matters. This is much better than in a quarterly magazine, although magazines do reach more people... In my former comments on Leadbeater, I put in a few bits of historic information, but was trying to focus on the difference in teachings and ideas, and how they might have arose from the difference in methods of investigation, a difference between learning and use of the intellect, as opposed to psychic observations of nature. I tried to stay one step removed from what Leadbeater may have privately taught, and from matters that might have touched upon his character. My reason was in knowing what the effect would be on someone considering Leadbeater a spritual hero of theirs, to someone accepting what he wrote at face value and believing him to be the person that his books would lead a reader to believe. I know that when I was heavily into reading him, and accepted uncritically what he wrote, that I would not believe what I was told, I would deny it regardless of the evidence presented me, and feel anger. I would not accept anything at the time that would challenge my worldview. This view included two basic assumptions: (1) Leadbeater was the way that he wrote he was, and (2) his writings were consistent with the Theosophy of H.P. Blavatsky and her Teachers. I would seek to avoid any information, any evidence to the contrary, and just listen to and cheer on anyone attaching the evidence, to people who would defend my worldview, people who would call the evidence as "lies made up by certain enemies of Theosophy, etc." If I were forced to face the evidence, I'd find someother way to explain it, so that it would not sound so bad. I'd fight off any challenge to my beliefs, and when not fully successful, would resort to some form of damage control. At this point in time, we can study Leadbeater as an historic figure. If he privately taught things that we'd consider unadvisable, it might not matter, since he's not around still teaching them. Whatever happened is now part of the past. If we can present the Theosophy of H.P.B. and the Masters in a clear, lucid manner, then people will open up to the ideas. We will eventually alter the views of people with other beliefs. And this would include those holding beliefs based upon Leadbeaters writings, where those beliefs had gone astray. We don't necessarily need a direct assult on the beliefs of others, where we challenge assumption two (above), where we challenge the belief that the Teachings were consistent by showing the many ways where they were not. It we expose people to the original Teachings, then they will grow and change, and they will cease to care about either assumption, not caring about Leadbeater's personal claims nor philosophical digressions, because they will have come into touch with the Source Teachings. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 13:22:39 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: swabhava, the ninth principle We now approach a silent, still part of ourselves, a dark, unknown part of our natures that is both a mystery, yet also is an important element of our lives. Our ninth principle, which might be called swabhava, is eternal, timeless, unchanging, but yet in relation to time. This principle of consciousness is both simple, plain, obvious, and at the same time a sacred mystery, not spoken of in simple words outside the halls of the Mysteries. We might, hear, were we to approach its study, in such a hall: "Enter ye in silent awe, as ye come face-to-face with thy God, and He takes off his mask, his final veil, and ye behold his true face, his pure self, undefined by participation in creation and its creatures!" This principle is one level removed, one above and beyond the experience of nirvana or personal non-existence. It is the sense of the ultimate meaning or purpose to life, and goest beyond what we can ever attain or hope to attain in life, no matter how hard we strive! In one sense, the ninth principle is like a mathematical limit, which can be approached closer and closer, but never reached. Yet it consists of shomething that we are and we know! It is like an attractor, in terms of chaos, an force which shapes and molds our destiny, always drawing forth qualities which we aspire to, but never attain, a higher influence. It contains all noble, high virtues, *as essential parts of being,* qualities after which we continually aspire, but never fully attain. No matter how perfect we make ourselves, how evolved, how completely we master the lessons of life, there are yet other stages or realizations to come. We never attain utter perfection, perfection is not a place or state, but rather a direction, a calling to be a certain way. And this direction or calling, this consciousness of perfection, is the nature of the ninth principle. Like the true north, to which all good compasses point, this principle represents the draw, the ideals, that drive our lives. In being our essential nature, our unique purpose in life, the specialness to your being as an individual Monad, it could be called Swabhava. It is the fuller treasury of experience, above and beyond the Auric Egg. Whereas the Auric Egg is the karmic treasure of experience, *in relation to time,* the sum or totality of our past as the living present, the ninth principle, Swabhava, could be considered the treasure box, the form that shapes the treasures that can and will be collected. Swabhava is the sum of the experiences of the past, the awareness of the living present, *and the future too.* It encompasses all of time, and is yet different and higher that time itself. Swabhava is the Treasure of timelessless. It is not based upon the accumulation of experience, but higher than that, it is the essential nature, untouched by experience, untouched by the moment-to-moment accumulation of karma. It would not be correct to just call it a higher plane, where things are seen relatively timeless to us here, from our point of view. It is timelessness as an actuality, and not timeless just because we've stepped into another universe and experience time there *instead of here.* Rather, we have rised in our own inner nature to that part of ourselves that is rooted in timelessness, is the unchanging, ever-eternal nature of life itself. Acting alone, Swabhava is unchanging, the experience of the Changless, one's pure nature untouched by either manifest existence nor by the sweep of time. In relation to time, it is ever-present Ideals, Goals, our Purpose in Being, the driving power of our special purpose and meaning in life. Considering our globe chain for a moment, we know of twelve globes, on the seven planes of existence. The upper five globes are on the highest three planes, the formless planes, and the lower seven glboes are on the four lower planes, the planes of form. There are no globes higher than these, although there are three higher planes or principles on which we could exist. On each plane, for each principle, there are both downward states, corresponding to the pathway of the Downward Arc, and upward states, corresponding to the sweep of the Upward Arc. These are the non-places at which we pass through during the experience of the Rounds. For Swabhava, there is the upwards and downwards sweep, the upwards and downwards states that we experience. The downwards is our purpose in life. The upwards is Swabhava in relation to the tenth, the highest principle. We must not take lightly our consideration of the ninth principle. We are talking about the *second* level of unmanifest being, really a state of non-being. We are talking about one aspect of our experience of non-existence, and are delving into deep mysteries, staring into the blackness of the unknown and seeking to *recall* what may be found therein. What is the timeless? Can it change too? Certainly not as we know it, not as we know change. Is there something to it that can itself grow and evolve? It does have its seven lowest sub-principles, but what they are is a mystery in itself! When we gaze at these deep Truths, when we approach them in our contemplation, we must do so with the greatest reverence, the greatest sense of devotion and religious feeling. We are looking deeper than, beyond our very God at the heart of our being, seeking to look and gaze upon our eternal essence, our very reason for existence at all! Above and behind all that we've made ourselves is that unique nature that *is us*. There are no words that can describe its experience. But it too forms part of the backdrop to the experience of life. It is one of the essential ingredients to consciousness and it integral to our every thought, feeling, and activity in or outself of life. It is beyond holiness, beyond mystery, beyond divinity. We approach our Ideal Self, our Heavenly Man, and it is us. It contains those grand virtues, noble qualities that we hold sacred, that not just deeply touch us but are truly the fabric of our very nature. They are both sought for, driving the endless self-becoming in life, and are *already a part of ourselves*, as a unchanging principle or element of our consciousness. Beyond radiant, beyond any form of expression, Swabhava lends a direction to life, based upon our own unique meaning and purpose for being, for why we should every have been Monads at all! Swabhava drives the sweep of time. It unifies past, present, and future, but dwells in none of them. It is both always present, and never attained. It is *always present* in its upwards reaching, in its aspiring upwards to the tenth principle. And it is *never-attained*, as it reaches down to the eighth principle. It is indestructable since it never exists as anything, and never has beginning nor end, in time nor in space. It just *is*, but does not *exist*. Were it not there to pull us along the sweep of time, there would be no us, we would never be at all. Truly a deep, holy Mystery, the ninth principle of consciousness is treasure of consciousness that we should approach in quiet and stillness, that we should approach in the sanctuaries of our hearts, and gaze upon in solitude. And we should take the utmost care when we leave the solitude and dare speak about it. For should we betray it, it will leave us, and we will lose our right to return, to come to it again in this lifetime. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 18:10:13 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: paramatman, our 10th principle As we push our studies of the ten princples of man to the limit, reaching the top-most principle, we are approaching a territory of study that boarders on materials that would sound like "insane gibberish" to uninformed ears. We are approaching difficult territories of thought. A quiet mind and an open heart are the best tools to apply to the task, as we ready ourselves to visit the unvisitable, to gaze upon the unseen, to reach out and touch the untouchable. We now come to the part of ourselves that is our personal element of the *mystery* behind life, the mystery that goes beyond embracing life, that goes to the very core of our beings. The final, the tenth principle of consciousness, is the utmost core of our being. It is the most difficult to describe, because being the most far-removed from our personal experience. A special type of thought is needed to contemplate it, and practice is needed in order to penetrate the first veil and have one's first clear conception of the principle. We might call this principle Paramatman. It is timeless and not in relation to time. It is not the ideal to anything. It is, in its basic nature, complete, perfect and unchanging, and not in relation to anything. Like in mathematics, the number '2' is perfect, eternal, not strived after nor changeable, neither the ideal to anything, nor something evolved, something growing and changing. Paramatman is our pure nature. It is not changeable in any manner. It is not only timeless, not only spaceless, but it idealless too; it does not seek anything. It is not contain any ideals because that implies something to look up to, and requires it to be in realtion to something in time and perhaps in space, in manifestation. It is the part of us that is not in relation to anything in life, for it is our pure essential nature. It is the flavor of pure being or pure non-existence, beyond our personal Ideal Nature, because it is a core consciousness shared by all, and therefore cannot have individual ideals or purpose for one Monad, one individual having it, that is different for another individual's experience of it. Like Atman is pure manifest self-consciousness, Paramatman is shared by all in the world. Paramatman is the pure consciousness of non-being. In a sense, it is like a laya center or dissolving point. It is the Crown of the top-most triad, the absolute top to our natures. Pure mathematics provides an analogy that we can use, since the mathematics is complete in itself, apart from whatever may or will happen in life. With Paramatman, we step out of Absolute Mystery, and through it we come into our Ideal Selves, the ninth principle. This is similiar to stepping through Atman, coming into being as a manifest Monad, as Atman-Buddhi. This tenth principle contains a certain element of virginal purity, untouched by anything. It never leaves home, never needs anything, is complete and perfect, but is also beyond perfection, beyond ideals, beyond either relation to time and existence and beyond having to transcend existence as well. Not only is it not subject to change, but it also contains no experience of being looked up to by the lower principles, nor experience of looking higher within. It is unaware of anything, because it is too full, too complete to contain any qualification. It has no qualities, no attributes. It is neither aware nor unaware as we know it. It is not a *mystery*, though. It is the final and ultimate element of our consciousness, and is not apart from us. We are it and we contain it. Paramatman is not capable of nor does it need the additional self consciousness of experience in time, nor does it need to stand as an ideal to one's eternal evolution. The idea of being at motion or rest, of changing, of brooding over the waters of space, of reaching out and uplifting--these all would be utter nonsense to it, if ideas were even possible! Our tenth principle, then, is our own personal element of *tat*, the unknowable, and is the ultimate basis of ourselves. It is not the prime mover, Swabhava, but rather the primal basis for all that follows. Paramatman always *is*, contains peace beyond words, is the Holiest of Holies, is the Prime Unmoveable Object, the Solitary One, the One Who Never Sleeps, the Absolute Zero. Where it possible to *enter* into this principle, to shift one's awareness through a laya center into it, at thought it were a plane that we could visit, it would result in the complete destruction of the Monad, of both karma and the timeless nature as well! But this is not possible for this level remains untouched by even the observation of outside eyes. It remains untouched even by the event of the Monad entering into it. It does not look outside itself, even though the lower principles hang off it like a pendant, and all look to and derive their ultimate basis for being from it. Although it never leaves its solitude, the Grand Scheme arises out of it. Beyond God and beyond the virtues that make God, we have come to the Unknowable, *within ourselves*, and stand in awe. We are not at a sanctuary to enter, because entry is not possible. But we do not have to enter, because we have never left. Everything is based upon it, and the ideals that drive our existence through time arise out of it--yet nothing can come out of it. The ideals, paradoxically, are anupapadaka, parentless, without progenitors. It is the parent of the parentless, which produces its offspring without having to be a parent. Paramatman is a fullness beyond the grandness of ideals, and needs to fulfilling nor waits for nor wants for anything. Yet it is absolutely empty of any possible want, desire, idea, empty of any content. It is complete unknowable, but part of our experience. And stands but one step removed from Mystery, about which nothing may be said. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 19:20:35 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Atman and C.W.L. Eldon I would question the idea of principles *above* Atman. Perhaps you were using this for lack of a better term, but I think it very misleading. Both Blavatsky and Purucker define Atman as the one universal--not really a principle at all. The Auric egg would not be "above" Atman, but like all the principles and planes, *encompassed* by Atman. Notice the chart of the principles of man in Blavatsky's E.S. Instructions. She replaces Atman with the Auric egg. Atman was used in her public writings as a blind for deeper teachings. As Purucker put it, the principles unfold themselves from the Auric Egg. Our seven, ten and twelve planes are more conveniences of classification to give a conception to things that are outside of human experience. Of course there are realities "above" and "below" our own universe of ten principles. Those realities are symbolized in the twelve-fold system. Regarding Leadbeater. I don't blame you for any inaccuracies in your account. There is so much misinformation circulating on him, that it is hard to keep things straight. One of the problems in getting an accurate picture of this period is the unavailability of reliable information. Tillett's book THE ELDER BROTHER is the best source for information on him. The book was originally a Doctoral dissertation, therefore written under the strictest academic standards. However, much of his documentation is from unpublished material, but I can personally vouch for its accuracy because I have seen copies of this material. There are two statements concerning this book that I often hear, that are obviously calculated to discredit it: That Tillett's dissertation was rejected for lack of scholarship, and that the book is biased. The truth is that Tillett's dissertation was accepted and he was awarded his Ph.D., which is an endorsement of its scholarship. The second criticism, that the book is biased, is a rather silly ruse. Obviously Tillett's dissertation committee was satisfied that his research was not biased. Even if it could be argued that the book is, that does not mean that it is not factual. Unfortunately, those vested in discrediting this book, are the same people who keep the documentation Tillett used from being published. I think the attitude you had when you were devoted to Leadbeater's writings is typical. I also agree with you that those who consider him a spiritual hero should be left alone. But there are some who out of devotion to him take rather radical action that I believe must be confronted. All of the published material documenting Leadbeater is extremely rare. Foot's two books on "pseudo-theosophy" are so rare that the number of copies still extant and not locked away in archives can probably be counted on one hand. We know of perhaps three sets of the Australian magazine DAWN that is still extant, in or outside of archives. The THEOSOPHIC VOICE, published by the dissatisfied parents of "Leadbeater's boys" is so rare that Nethercott (Besant's biographer) was unable to locate a copy and concluded that it never existed. Believe me, it does. Why is this material so rare, when positive material on leadbeater, printed in similar quantities, is so relatively common? The story is that Besant had asked her E.S. members to destroy this material as they found it. I can't confirm this story, but if it is so, it explains the rarity of this material. I remember about twenty years ago, I knew a devotee of Leadbeater who was a member of the T.S. and E.S. during Leadbeater's time. When I knew him, he was a book seller, and I was one of his best custiomers. One day I asked if he had run into any copies of the O.E. LIBRARY CRITIC (This is another publication that was critical of Leadbeater). My book dealer friend became visibly upset when I asked this question and said "No! I haven't seen any, and if I do, I will burn them!" I asked, why would you want to do that? He answered, "Because they are full of lies, and they all should be burned!" Fortunately, the Edmonton Lodge has reprinted the O.E. LIBRARY CRITIC and DAWN. So now there are lots more copies to burn--or to read, if one is so inclined. Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 20:37:48 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: clarification of Louise C. Mead messages... hi ! Louise is letting a local friend in Charlotte use her vnet account. Hence mail sent from Louise will actually be from Robert Cain. I will try to update the distribution list name accordingly... Peace -- John Mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 09:45:29 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Sick unwanted meanderings This is by Brenda Tucker. Jerry, I hope you enjoyed your little sideshow to theosophy, where you and the rest of the members involved can just attempt to belittle and ridicule someone dear and beloved to some of the rest of us. In the guise of presenting the facts, you're giving the same old picture I've always gotten in this area and that is that you don't have to love anyone who can't withstand YOUR OWN PECULIAR TEST OF WORTHINESS. You and other people, including my husband are turning history into gossip and instead of talking of something useful and presentable, you are bringing up painful issues in the insincerest light and ridiculing people who deserve nothing but the highest esteem. I haven't enjoyed your work here for sometime and I hope you can come up with something more insightful in the future. Perhaps something involving the work of the adepts, instead of the treacherous work of the human beings who had nothing to lose because they couldn't contribute like our beloved Leadbeater could. If you really were a leader, you'd lead this whole area off this often repeated and sick topic of who is deserving of the credit, love, and admiration that we give Leadbeater for his work. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 10:09:22 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: intensification of karma in probation In entering chelaship in a particular lifetime, we go through a period of probation, a period of about seven years in which the karma of the current life can come out and be dealt with. This allows us to devote much of the remainder of our life to the Work. But what does it mean for dammed-back karma to come rushing forth? Does it mean that we encounter a rush of pain, misery, and suffering, which we have to wade through, to stand up against, and to endure, as a rite of passage, as a price that must be paid in order to deserve admission to the spiritual path? At the end of devachan, when the energies of the previous life have exhausted themselves, the moment comes when the impulse to new life happens, when the decision at the highest levels within is made to come forth into life again. The nature of this impulse, the qualities of it, the energies in it, go to shape the life that will be. Much like the opening impulse of a Manvantara, issued forth from the Dhyani Chohans, acting as Manus, governs the coming period of evolution in the world, our own impulse sounds the keynote of the life to come. A new ray of the Monad issues forth, to become the personality that will exist in the world. And this ray contains a portion of the whole man, containing some of the interests, qualities, attributes, and characteristics of him, that portion of him which will be experienced in the life to be. When we think of the person as a separate individual, we consider these qualities as attributes of self. When we take a higher standpoint, and consider all life as inter-related, we consider there not being qualities, but rather a web of relationships with all of life, a karmic web, a mass or body of karma that will shape and define the person to be. That body of karma is the karma destined for the life, and defines the person to be. In a normal lifetime, it unfolds itself slowly, coming out over the entire lifespan of the person. But when we undertake the Path, the process is changed. With the Path, there is a dual experience of existence. The normal course of life as a personality is still gone through, for that *is* what we are at this time; we are human egos at this point of evolution. But another side of ourselves, a higher part, also comes into play, and accomodation is made so that it too may enjoy some experience, so that it too can be lived out in some fashion. Life is pushed harder, and like a system undergoing stress, it undergoes a bifurcation, a point of transformation, after which there are *two* selves that we experience things through. We have the ordinary personality, and another, a higher self, the individuality, as a second ego in which we can also experience life. The Masters have written how they are ordinary men, in bodies of flesh, just like us, and when functioning in their ordinary selves, in their personalities, are just as fallable and likely to make mistakes as any of us. It is just, they say, when the human element is paralyzed, and they temporarily function in another part of their nature, that they are actually functioning as Mahatmans. In probation, we would have started this dual track of personal development, of the outer self and a new, budding inner self. The life of the personality must be fulfilled, the karma is not dropped, but another life is cultivated too, apart from the personality. When we hear that the karma of a lifetime comes up to meet us in the period of probation, in but seven years, we must not assume the worst! Karma is *not* merely a burden of suffering, waiting to cursh us. It can also be apparently unmerrited good fortune. It can help us in doing the work, and is not necessarily a collection of obstacles in our way. Don't look at karma as deferred punishment. It is not. When we hear of all coming forth in probation, we are seeing the experiences of a lifetime coming out in a short period of time. The value to having all our karma come forth in probation is to allow us to devote a period of time, the seven years, to getting our life in order, to giving a direction to what all our karmic experiences will take, a spin to it. This allows us to organize how the events of our life will unfold, to order them, so that we can make room in our life for something else as well. When we speak of karma being intensified, that does not mean that is all happens quickly, then is over, exhausted, and gone. Our ability to interact with outers in life, and the very fabric of our beings, is our karma, our living links to the rest of life. This does not all go away after seven years. The intensification of karma refers to all the events of the life, all the people we will know, all the things that we will experience, all the aspects of our personality's nature, to be drawn forth, to be called into action. This is so that we can *start* things, not so that we can have them all finished and over with. This *starting* of things, in a short period of time, is to allow us a concentrated period where we can organize the direction that they will take in our lives. We cultivate the remainder of our lives, so that there is *room* for other types of work and experiences, gaps in our personal experiences and responsibilities, for other types of experiences and responsibilities. Our life is not regulated by some external lesson plan that we must follow. The analogy of life being a school has merit, but we must not carry it too far or we will be mislead. We have certain personal responsibilities to others, and these karmic links are not debts to be paid, where we try to pay them off quickly so that we are no longer burdened with them. The karmic connections are living links, that do not go away. In probation, we come into contact with these people, who make up our personal lives, and establish the nature of our future relationship with them. We do it according to the revised plan for our lives, rather than by chance, as we might have come across them later in life, perhaps only meeting them when we were 60 or 70 years old. We are not free of the complusion to take physical birth, but can transform and adapt our personality as best as we can. The intensification of karma that we experience in probation is not as where every experience of our lifetimes are rushing forth to be lived out in seven years. Rather, it is where we are faced with a bewildering rush of *choices*, all at once, where we are starting or sprouting every seed of karma in the life. We start everything during this period, while we are giving our full attention to shaping the direction that our lives will take, so that we can also have opportunities, periods, gaps in our lives where we also experience another side to life. And we fashion ourselves during this time so that the remaining life has as much flexibility as possible to allow us to participate in the work. Our personal karma still defines the limits on who and what we will be, and we still work within the established structure of life, but we seek to make the best of things. We are still the same person, and still have the same personal ties and responsibilities to fulfill, but we've organized them to allow us to do the best work that we can. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 16:04:46 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: enumeration of the seven principles Jerry H-E: Your question about Atman is a good one, and it may take a few discussions to present my point of view. Here at work, I'll try one or two further notes on the subject, and then may go to some quotes from home later in the week. In this note, I'll talk about the seven principles and something of the place of the other, the higher ones. ---- When we read of the principles of consciousness, the first description that we encounter is that of the seven *manifest* principles, the aspects or elements of our consciousness that make up us as *beings*. What we know of ourselves, in existence, is by way of these principles, which clothe themselves with materials from the various parts of nature, the shandhas. The enumeration of the principles depends upon the particular point that is being emphasized. There are two ways to picture our nature: as a fixed self or as a stream of consciousness. Taking the point of view of a fixed self, we have the eternal Self (existing for the duration of this eternity, this manvantara). That Self, Atman, clothes itself in various elements of consciousness, down to and including a physical form, the Sthula Sharara. So an enumeration with this point of view in mind would count the seven priniples from Atman to the physical. Taking the point of view of a stream of consciousness, we have the source, the fountainhead of the stream, the Auric Egg, through which all pours forth, reaching down to the Linga Sharira, the perceptions. But Atman is not included, because there is no such thing as a fixed, eternal Self, and the physical too is excluded, as not really being an aspect of cousciousness. Either enumeration breaks down our nature according to a different way of looking at it. They are both true from their respective points of view. But from yet a third point of view, though, everything should be included. The breakdown should include The Auric Egg, Atman, and everything else down and through the physical. When we consider Atman, it might be argued that it is part of our nature, or not part of our nature, because it is universal, shared by all, an all-embracing form of cousciousness. It may be universal, but it still is part of ourselves, we still have it as a portion of the totality of our natures, it too is necessary to make us up, as we are, and so I'd call it one of our principles. The principles are the ingredients of a full, complete consciousness, and it is lacking without some of them. This includes the principles that pertain to consciousness that is oblivious to any sense of personal selfhood. The universal sense of Self that we acquire from Atman, comes from the essential nature of that being whose embodied existence provides or allows for the existence of our world. Our world, or on a greater scale, our universe, is the embodiment of a greater being, and we all partake of the nature of his consciousness, of his experience of life. Now when we talk about Atman as a sense of universal self, I'd be careful about the word *universal*, because in manifestation there *is* no absolute universal. No matter how big, how embracive, how far-reaching a manifestation, a state, a scope of consciousness, there is always something bigger. When we say that Atman is *universal*, we mean it in the same sense as we mean the term *absolute*, which is relative to the world or universe in which we exist. But we are talking about our experience of *existence*, of manifest being, and not of what we are constituted of apart from any embodiment. We read of ten or twelve principles of consciousness, with the ones higher that the manifest seven relating to an unmanifest state of being, or rather to a state of non-being. These principles, above Atman, have their own essential natures too, and are derived from our supreme sense of self, Paramatman, the fount of all that is and all that is not, the ultimate source of all individual Monads. Coming into birth in a world, we first clothe ourselves in Atman, in the *universal* consciousness as it pertains to the unique nature of that world, and then further clothe ourselves in the remaining lower principles. Atman itself is *apparently* colorless, in the same sense as, for a fish in a tank, something matching the color of the water in the fishtank would appear to be colorless. And we don't have a sense of any individual nature to our consciousness until we also clothe it in Buddhi as well. Coming into birth in a world, we clothe ourselves, we build up our principles, in the materials of that world, including the Atmic and Buddhic materials. Now we come to some important questions. What is it to us when we don't exist, when we are not clothed in the seven principles, apart from participation in manifestation in a world? Whare are the stages or degrees of non-being, above and beyond any manifest existence? Where in our natures is the treasure of karmic experience, from the previous mahamanvantaras, experience that makes us up but has not had a chance to be evolved forth in the Monad as we now know ourselves to be? And how are we rooted in the Unknowable, in Tat? We are now facing the distinction between the seven principles of manifestation and those of the unmanifest. And I would say that the unmanifest is not merely a matter of *relativity,* where something has the appearance of being unmanifest from a lower plane's point of view, but is manifest in its own right, manifest on its own, a higher plane. I would disagree with that. I would consider that to be a mental trick that we might play to avoid dealing directly with having to understand what it truly means to be unmanifest. We know that the principles of consciousness are all required to make up our full consciousness. And I would say that the higher principles, those that relate to the unmanifest aspects of nature, are also essential ingredients, and are also always present, always an element of our every experience, even though we may be unaware of them. There are parts of our consciousness that reach far deeper than the sense of personal self, parts that link us to the greatest, the deepest, the most sublime aspects of the mystery of being. And these are also principles, ingredients, even though they are themselves unmanifest. How do we explain and talk about the unmanifest? How do we show attributes and distinctions between things that do not exist? It certainly is not as easy to do as to study the seven manifest principles. But we have been given the keys to unlock mysteries that go beyond the most plainly-stated truths in our theosophical books, and I'd suggest that we apply them and see what we find. The first step is analysis and logic, where we apply the core concepts of Theosophy and see how they fit together. Then we apply them, the keys, to the ideas that we would explore. Do the new ideas ring true? Do they seem obvious, simple, plain, yet resound in our minds in their brilliance? Do we find the ideas inside ourselves as well, where there is also a form of personal experience to their contemplation? We can consider all of this as we approach the subject. We go the first step--a very important step--with scholarship and the trained use of the intellect. We need clarity, accuracy, and the never-ending checking of our views against the Teachings. But we also use both intuition, direct mental insight, and what might be called *contextual memory*, where we bring up a whole mass of thought and associated ideas when we study one of the Teachings. Everything in the Teachings is inter-related, and we bring much more into our awareness, when we contemplate a simple Truth, than the simple meaning of that Truth, by itself. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 16:58:38 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: prana This is by Brenda Tucker. Gerry and Betty: Have you ever heard of the work of Martha S. Russell? Florice Tanner reports on this work and the universal principles embodied in it, which she states are mentioned only briefly in the Russell's books, (A MUSIC LENS ON HISTORY, 1952; SWING, SWING, PLAY, 1938) but which are freely stated in the unpublished notes given to her pupils (Florice Tanner among them). The article I'd like to report on is found in SCIENCE, YOGA AND PHILOSOPHY, a selection of papers presented at The Centenary International Convention of The Theosophical Society in December, 1975. Its title is "Subtle Energies Used in Daily Tasks," it is by Florice Tanner, and it covers several responsibilities she believes the earnest student has as well as Russell's research on prana. One reason for presenting it here and now is as a response to Gerald and Betty Schueler's "The Laws of Chaos Magic." Gerry and Betty discuss Magic Points, critical points where a small change can have large consequences. They say also that, "Magic Points are seldom obvious, and stimulation of a Magic Point usually gets bad results before it gets better." Here are some of Tanner's thoughts: Prana, an invisible vitality which we can feel and can direct, must be released upward and outward as the lung-breath is released downward. This balance attained, a normal primary process, frees our self-expression and bodily movement, integrating the person and their activity. Likewise, every thought or mental organism is related to respiration as a concept is defined upon inhalation causing invisible leverages to focus automatically in relation to our concept. The point between the inhalation and exhalation is most critical. This point must be flexible so that the negatively polarized force may change direction into the positive or overt step. With split-second equilibrium and timing: if the pranic currents are released upward simultaneously as the lung-breath and "body" rest downward, the impulse to action will build freely toward completion. Another polarized release at the climax of the action, or turning point of energy, gives the quality of fulfillment or a feeling of at-onement. Physical and mental energies are as essential as pranic currents, and form together the precisely needed thrust, quality, and timing to complete the concept and enhance action. Quality determines the degree of wholeness in the concept-body-action relationship. If this is not understood intellectually, try realizing it experimentally. "The split second of quiet equilibrium at these pivotal points provides a feeling of flexible readiness, receptivity, givingness, and openness." The more complete the balance, the more fused is the experience of wholeness. "Unfortunately we each have limiting factors such as mental, emotional, physical tensions, Karma, and a host of specific inhibiting forces." Thereby, a consciously controlled effort can aid in overcoming the limitations. Mrs. Russell identified definite points (in arms, legs, head, torso, and periphery segments) where the mental leverages focus in relation to specific action. The leverages focus automatically in relation to intent before any visible movement occurs. First, impulse springs from a breathing centre at the crossing of the diaphragm muscle, then moves through the etheric focus of leverages, then becomes overt movement. The point where the etheric leverage is found changes according to the rhythm (or timing and speed of movement). In general, the leverages focus at specific levels nearer our centre for fast movements and nearer our periphery for slower expression. For example, slightly above the knee or above the elbow (and relatively in the head, torso, and smaller segments) for walking or marching (4/4 rhythm) speed. A faster rhythm (eighth notes in music) focuses the leverages higher and slower rhythms (half notes) focus the etheric leverages below the knee, below the elbow, and similarly in other segments. "Leverages focus, not only in relation to timing, but also include slight variations influenced by distance, speed, individual body proportions, karma, emotional quality, and a mathematical complex that is beyond our comprehension." The oneness or wholeness of our expression depends on our ability in releasing the pranic-physical energy breath and the effect in setting free the point of focus. Usually, when considering smaller parts, such as a hand, as a whole, one part is more active, usually the periphery, and one part acts as a stabilizer. The fingers and the hand, for example. "Reversal of this functioning accounts for many frustrations, in personal life and in eras of history." With the whole body, the part above the diaphragm is active and below is the stabilizing portion. To free the point necessary for whole body movement, release the pranic force between these segments at the crossing points of the diaphragm muscle. For holistic action of the arm, the point between the attaching segment and the extending segment, when stimulated by pranic release frees the grace and ease of the arm. One finding has to do with a vertical release of prana contributing to the receptive activities, such as listening to a speaker, and the out-going activities are enhanced by releasing prana and breath to localize a lateral thrust, in activities such as shaking hands, comforting, blessing, or sending healing thoughts. This experimental work has been applied in schools and gives more controlled efficiency in moving, listening, organizing materials and thoughts, in emotional balance and freedom. Ms. Tanner makes a call for additional research in this area by both occult groups and Universities. Biofeedback graduate work at Northwestern University was interrupted by World War II. Occult groups and individuals could explore ways to use these principles in simple movement and in emotional, mental, and spiritual applications so these subtle energies may better serve mankind. "These two segments of energy, when released as polar opposites, free our physical equipment for fullness of expression. This polarized balance at the beginning or impulse point starts overt expression. The potential vital energy is released immediately to the climax of the intent; then the physical, gravitational energy springs or extends through time and space to join this vital energy segment. This merging at the climax of the action is culminated by another release of energy-breath to fully free or complete the expression. In rapid action this second breath release may become the impulse release for the next intent. When we use polarized energy-breath, we are resilient, balanced, and stable. When we fail to use polarized energy-breath, we limit both ourselves and our subsequent action or expression. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 22:09:18 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Coments to Eldon Eldon. I rather like your description of Auric Egg, Swabhava, and Para-atman, as the three principles above Atman, but what is your source for this? G de P makes a clear distinction between Swabhava and Swabhavat in his Occult Glossary, but I have found little references to any Swabhavat in Buddhist literature. However, there is plenty to be found on Swabhava. And it is this that has bothered me for many years. Virtually all theosophists put Swabhava in a good light, either extolling its virtues or describing it as practically holy. Most Buddhists writers, on the other hand, associate it with Maya and make it sound very negative. Of course, I can say the same for reincarnation. D.T. Suzuki, a Zen Buddhist, in Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism, p. 170-171, says that "Svabhava and atman are thus habitually used by Buddhists as quite synonymous." He also says, "...all things in their phenomenal aspect are devoid of individual selves, that it is only due to our ignorance that we believe in the thingness of things, whereas there is no such thing as svabhava or atman or noumenon which resides in them." This is pure Mahayana Buddhism. And HPB as well as Olcott became Buddhists. Yet theosophists, including G de P (who otherwise seems to be very savy to Buddhist ideas) always downplays suchness and emptiness, while emphasizing Swabhava (or Svabhava as Suzuki spells it) and Atman. I was deep into Buddhism before discovering theosophy, and I have always wondered why theosophists are so quick to promote Swabhava as something wonderful (Buddhists teach that it is only as wonderful as Maya itself). Ditto for reincarnation, which Buddhism teaches is equivalent to a Wheel of Suffering and emphasizes a Way out of it. Theosophy tends to emphasize reincarnation as something wonderful, and teaches that the Way out of it is to endure for a hundred more lifetimes until maybe a Master will take pity on you and you will be ready for enlightenment. This, in my humble opinion, is a very large difference between theosophy and Buddhism, and I have yet to have anyone ever explain it to my satisfaction. It seems to me that either no theosophist has ever really understood suchness or emptiness, or else they have deliberately chosen to ignore it. Perhaps this is where the "mysteries" and "higher teachings" come into play? Suzuki calls enlightenment the "Ultimate Joke" because after attaining it, you realize that you always had it. You also realize that Atman (ie the idea of an individual spiritual entity or spiritual individuality) is as real and substantial as mayavic mist. You are quite right about there being three additional cosmic planes beyond Globe D-prime to make a total of ten. In the Qabala, these three planes are called Ain, Ain Soph, and Ain Soph Aur. HPB was well aware of these three planes, but said almost nothing about them. As an interesting aside, in Qabalistic figures of the Tree of Life, you will almost always find these three planes forming ovals around the ten Sephiroth, encompassing them like an auric egg rather than lying totally beyond/above them. Concerning Leadbeater, I agree with you that his writings do not seem to be spiritual inspiring. I like his treatment of the astral and mental planes, but little else. I don't care to defend him, but I will say that masterbation is indeed a well-known technique used in virtually all schools of sex magic for countless centuries. The fact that masterbation was referred to as self "abuse" tells me more about his accusers than about him. Hopefully we are now living in a more enlightened age. However, teaching such techniques to children, even as a means of sexual decompression or a form of safe sex, is certainly questionable. I don't know all of the facts concerning what he did or was thought to have done and so have never judged one way or the other. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 22:10:16 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Birthday Don, Re my birthday, I was born on 29 October 1942. I don't know the time. However, my mother's doctor had planned a vacation at the time I should have been born, and so to avoid any unpleasant complications with his vacation, he induced me several weeks early. I was born as a "blue" baby, and given about a 50 percent chance of making it. I was raised on goat's milk for my first several years (you couldn't buy this those days, and so my parents actually bought a goat and milked it themselves). I did not want to be born, and came kicking and screaming all the way. I was very skinny and sickly all my young life until about 12 when my family came into Christian Science. Thereafter, from 12 to 22 I was exceptionally healthy (I didn't know what a headache was, and did not take so much as an aspirin during this time). After leaving Christian Science for Theosophy and occultism, my earlier poor health gradually returned. Hope this helps. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 05:51:58 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Leadbeater and Svabhavat Brenda Tucker, I'm glad to hear that you were already familiar with the history concerning Leadbeater. Whether or not he is worthy of devotion is an individual matter, and I wouldn't dream of trying to talk anyone out of their deeply held beliefs, least of all you. My own evaluation of Leadbeater, for the purposes of the discussion at hand was irrelevant, as my purpose was to clarify the sequence of events concerning the scandal between 1906 and 1908. I feel that I have accomplished that necessary task, and am ready to drop it. According to my Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Gossip is defined as 1. "idle talk or rumor, esp. about personal or private affairs of others: the endless gossip about Hollywood stars. 2. light familiar talk or writing." My discourse on this historical period was hardly idle, as I took considerable time reviewing documents to assure that what I wrote was correct. Since this was based upon documents, my little essay hardly fits the description of rumor. I concede that if Leadbeater were alive, this subject would be personal to him, but on the other hand, that fact that the documentation we have on this incident is drawn from documents generated by officials of the Theosophical Society, the issue should not be considered private. Though I understand that many would prefer this matter to remain secret. But that is another story. Perhaps you are drawing from a different definition of "gossip." If so, you will need to enlighten me. I'm afraid that you have misjudged my motives. I was perfectly sincere in responding to these "painful issues" as you call them. Who was I ridiculing? For many people, Leadbeater is deserving of "credit, love and admiration" as you say. My suggestion is that you take this opportunity to educate us of the things that Leadbeater has done that you find deserving of "credit, love, and admiration." Also, if I have made any error of fact concerning the events of 1906- 1908, I think it your duty to correct me on them, and present your documentation. I'm always ready to retract any information proven to be erroneous. Eldon Tucker When I use the term *universal*, I usually mean it in terms of the solar system or of the galaxy, depending upon the context. I believe this to be consistent with both Blavatsky's and Purucker's usage. I agree with your use of the word *absolute* as relative to the "world or universe" if you are implying that this term also can be used in different contexts. I would be careful of using the term *absolute* in the context of quantification however, as I don't think it works without misusing the term. The *absolute* that H.P.B. uses in the cosmology in THE SECRET DOCTRINE is in contest to the Solar System. This may surprise you, but look into THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE BLAVATSKY LODGE, where she discusses the number 4,030,000,000,000, and you will see what I mean. Jerry S. My I put my two cents worth in on this svabhavat/svabhava business? Svabhavat is of course mentioned about ten times in the cosmology section of THE SECRET DOCTRINE, and discussed at length on two of those occasions. H.P.B. associates this philosophical term with a sect of Buddhists she called Svabhavikas. I have never seen this sect mentioned outside of THE SECRET DOCTRINE, but Buddhism is not a subject I consider myself up on. The term Svabhava, on the other hand, I have seen used once, or no more than twice in all of H.P.B.'s writings, and then only mentioned in passing. Purucker, on the other hand, makes extensive use of this term. In my experience, the term "svabhava" as a theosophical term is almost unknown outside of the Point Loma tradition. The term is not used at U.L.T., and Adyar theosophists are not familiar with this word, unless they have read Purucker. Personally, in the context of Buddhists studies, I would go by Suzuki's definition, and just keep in mind that Purucker uses this term in his own way. Sometimes Theosophical terms are like that. H.P.B.'s definition of "Devachan" does not pass scrutiny among Buddhist scholars. Other Theosophical terms may be correctly used in some schools but incorrect in others. I had a talk with Dr. Santucci on this subject some years ago. His specialty is Vedic Studies. We had a dialogue comparing Blavatsky's presentation of the Advaita Vedanta to Dr. Santucci's understanding of the teaching of that school, and found a lot of differences. I can't account for these differences. Many may be due to the discrepancies between popular expositions of religious ideas and deeper, inside information. But the main lesson I have learned is that it is a mistake to assume that the definitions of theosophical terms as we have them, are representative of how they are defined in the religions they are drawn from. Concerning Leadbeater. The term "self abuse" was the polite term for masturbation in Victorian society. In order to avoid speaking of things concerning sexuality, the victorians had quite a code worked out. You might find it interesting to read some of the novels of that period. Babies came out of nowhere, and two lovers having sexual relations was usually coded with the phase "they kissed." The school of sex magic came to the surface around 1904-5 through Aleister Crowley. Tillett has a theory that Leadbeater may have drawn his ideas from him or from a common source, but that can't be proven one way or the other so far. You might be quite interested in Tillett's documentation of Leadbeater's inner group practices however. Unfortunately some theosophists are still in a Victorian consciousness and sensitive to modern terminology. At a meeting at the Los Angeles Branch, a woman once used the word "penis" in a discussion. One of the older members was deeply shocked. Since I was President at the time, he complained to me bitterly and insisted that I talk to her. I did, but she didn't understand the problem. "My mother was a Nurse" she said, "that was the term we learned to use." Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 15:41:17 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: maya and the highest triad Jerry H-E & Jerry S: I will have to take responsibility for my description of the three highest principles, until I can at some point make a case with quotes. For now, though, I do have a few more comments regarding them. ---- The terms used in theosophical literature have a multitude of meanings. Different truths are expounded with the same words. It can be extremely frustrating to study, when trying to pin down specific meanings to the terms, given the manner in which the terms are used. We are told that this is sometimes done on purpose, to veil deeper truths from those without the proper training, without the proper keys to unlock the special meanings. We also find the same terms used to describe different things because of the inter-related nature of life, where a truth can be talked about by describing ideas related to it, talked about using a form of indirection that allows the student to seize upon the truth, to make the connection himself. This method of teaching allows the student the merit of arriving at the thought himself, and does not put additional karmic burdens upon his teacher. A third reason for terms being used in Theosophy with multiple meanings is the lack of a rich vocabulary in the English language. Even with a sprinkling of foreign words from Sanskrit and other languages, we are held back by our lack of words to use. Our theosophical literature has an additional handicap, in the sense that the terms it uses to describe the Esoteric Philosophy are mostly borrowed from other religions and philosophies. We can never safely assume that when we use terms like "sunyata" or "swabhava" that what they mean to us is the same as what they mean in the religion that they are borrowed from. In "The Secret Doctrine," we read of how the Wisdom Tradition agrees with certain ideas found throughout the many religions of the world. We read of agreement, and at times of disagreement as well. There is not a complete embracing of any particular religion or philosophy as wholly correct. When we consider the term "maya," for instance, we hear that it refers to the illusory nature of physical life, that it says that what we see and feel is false, something not truly real. But with a deeper understanding, we see that it refers to *misperception*. There is something before us that is real, that does exist, that actually is there, but we do not see it correctly. Walking in the dark, for instance, we mistake a rope on the ground for a snake and are startled. The rope was there, it is real, but we misperceived it, we falsely saw a snake where there was none. This misperception can be in terms of any of our principles. We can feel and think things about events in life and other people that are not related to them, but which rather arise from the content of our own consciousness, where psychological projection has replaced peception, and we see what we want rather than see what is really there. A religion may describe the various aspects of life as good or as bad depending upon the intended affect upon its followers. Reincarnation may be denied in popular Christianity in an attempt to make people more pious about living a spiritual life, through making people more concerned about being good people due to the thought that we may only have one time. The wheel of rebirth may be described as a form of suffering that we need to escape from, in Hinayana Buddhism, because it teaches the goal of individual liberation. On the other hand, in Mahayana Buddhism, which teaches the path of compassion, the path of the Bodhisattva that stays behind to help others, rebirth is also the means of living out the *highest* aspect of life, the aspect of self-sacrifice. When we consider the essential nature of a man, swabhava, it can be looked upon as good or bad too, based upon what point we are trying to make, and upon the way that we are looking on life. If we consider the personal self, its characteristics could be considered as mental baggage that are unnecessarily carried along, baggage that keeps the man from really experiencing life. We may be taught to let go of the image that we have of ourselves, of our habits and personal quirks and perferences in life and experience direct perception. We are taught to develop direct, buddhic insight into the experience of life, and to transcend the crippling sense of self. Transcending the sense of self is fine, and we can experience life from the standpoint of principles in ourselves higher than Manas, at which it arises. We can experience life from the standpoint of a stream of consciousness, without any fixed sense of self. It is an alternate experience of life from the one of having a supreme self, Atman, and it is an equally valid mode of being. We can go back and forth between the two modes of being. Buddhism may emphasize the experience of life from the standpoint of the stream of consciousness, and seek to teach us to transcend any sense of self. The idea of swabhava could be interpreted as the baggage of self, the collection of personal characteristics or colorings that may us the particular personalities that we are. In this sense, and for this purpose, it could be described as bad. But swabhava could also refer to the inmost characteristics of being, of one's inner nature, the storehouse of one's karmic experience that makes up the sum total of the individual's personal evolution. Over countless ages we have evolved ourselves to be what we are, and there is a living, dynamic aspect of us that represents this totality of ourselves, a totality rooted in time and changing at every moment. We might say that this totality of being, this sum of our evolution, through *all of time*, our evolution as Monads, is our swabhava. But I would use the term for something still higher. I would say that there is a part of our natures that is timeless, that is higher than time, that is unchangeable, but in relation to us. This is our *essential* nature, what is unique about us, an ever-present ideal that drives us throughout time. This nature is our Ever-Becoming, our purpose and meaning in life, an Ideal that is never reached, but is still very much a part of ourselves. And I would call this our truly essential nature, and apply the term "swabhava," not in the sense of any personal baggage or residuals of prior experience, but rather our own unique *image*, our own Heavenly Man within, the very specialness that allows us to be individual Monads, that allows us to be ourselves, that allows the very creation of us as Monads, were the term "creation" acceptable, since we are taking about something beyond time, without beginning nor end. We are dealing with a difficult subject, something that is not openly discussed in theosophical books, because it is so far removed from anything that we may have known before. We are dealing with the nature and characteristics of things that are not things, the attributes of a part of our nature that does not *exist*, but rather deals with the various experiences of *non-being*. A discussion of our nature cannot stop at what we exist as. *What we are*, is not complete, without also considering *what we are not*. There is a part of ourselves that reaches into non-being, above and behind the elements that are drawn together to form us in existence. This part is above and behind the seven principles, ourselves clothed in skandhas from the elements of outer nature. We are not our bodies. We are not physical bodies of flesh and blood. But we are also not our manifest principles, our collections of skandhas drawn together when *we* come to this world and take on embodied existence. We are something more, something that reaches into the non-existing, something that goes to the very core of the mystery of life itself. And this is as much a real, living part of ourselves as any outer form or attribute that we take on. The experience of non-being or non-existence is an integral part of our consciousness, and we do not have a complete description of consciousness when we only talk about the seven principles, about the elements of our manifest consciousness. With each step away from existence, something is left behind, something is absent, but also something new is gained, a new level of liberation or freedom has been attained. I would describe these steps in terms of four levels, three of which constitute our highest principles, principles eight, nine, and ten, and the fourth level as a Mystery about which nothing can be said. At the first level of non-existence, we are *not in space*, but still in time, and changing moment to moment is response to the ever-changing flux of life. We still have something to us, and this is our karmic storehouse, our treasury of experience, the sum of our evolution *to this point in time*. It is the living, dynamic, ever-changing suchness to us, to our nature. Going one step further, we are *not in time*, but still in relation to what is. We have reached our eternal Ideals. In this principle resides our essential uniqueness, our ever-sought for goals in life, the force that sweeps or draws us through time, our ever-present destiny. And going to the final step, our tenth principle, the highest of the topmost triad, we are *not*. There is no relation, just an essential thatness, *tat*, as a principle. We can call it a principle, but it is no more personally a part of ourselves than Atman is, because in it there ie neither experience nor experiencer. I mentioned also a fourth level, which is a Mystery. That's about all I can say about it, because there is no way to describe it or know it, by affirmation nor by negation. No quality or attribute can be inferred regarding it. It cannot even be called unknowable. It's as though it weren't really there, but we can't even say that. Coming back to the essential point, it is important to stress the fact that there *are* qualities to non-being, that we *experience* non-being as an integral part of life, and the qualities to non-being *are* principles of consciousness themselves. But as principles, they are both unique to our particular experience of life as a ten-principled being in a world or universe, as well as of a universal nature, spanning everywhere we might be. This universality has to do with the pure nature of the principles. The qualities--if we can use such a word--of the highest principles, are based upon how they are in relation to the manifest world, and how they are in relation to each other. (The qualities are also derived from their seven lowest subprinciples, but this is another matter!) In our studies of such theosophical books as "Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy," or "The Inner Group Teachings," we can find many hints that help us fill out our ideas of the highest, the unmanifest principles of consciousness. We take the Teachings a bit farther than the books, though, not a lot, just a bit farther than what was plainly said in the texts, and they start to come together and tell us a lot! The process of teaching is not just to impart information from Teacher to student, but rather to awaken the student's innate ability to realize and approach the Teachings directly. We are taught to think for ourselves and go farther that we had heard. Our Teacher will always hint, allude to, and direct our thoughts to greater Truths, in order to allow us, individually, to arrive at them ourselves. The process of teaching is to awaken the inner teachers in the students, to awaken their own buddhic splendor and illumine their minds from within. We must follow this, we must take what is given to us and *push it further*, using our own innate faculties, our own personal rootedness in Mahat, to arrive at the deeper Truths. Until we do so, we come up to a wall, a barrier, after which no further progress can be made. We go as far as the brain-mind understanding of the books can take us, and stand far short of the treasury of Mystery Teachings that await us therein. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:30:57 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Seven Eldon writes: >In entering chelaship in a particular lifetime, >we go through a period of probabtion, a period >of about seven years in which the karma of the >current life can come out and be dealt with. I confess that when I read this, my initial reaction was that a period of 7 years is bunk. Why does everyone want to fit things into sevens? After thinking about this awhile, I decided to look at my own past. I was sickly as a child until I was about 14, when I learned how to heal with Christian Science. I went through a period of extreme health until I was 21 and I left the church (I was accused of teaching yoga and other eastern ideas in my Sunday school classes. I quit. Later I was told that the offender was someone else. They apologized and I was asked to return. I declined and have never looked back.) In 1963 (when I was 21) I had a SEE (a significant emotional event) which almost did me in. My older brother died from a gun that wasn't supposed to be loaded. I met the Angel of Death, face to face. Although I had encountered death before, he had never been so close to me. Now I could see his face and look right into his eyes, and I was terrified. I only survived this with the loving help of my wife, who introduced me to the texts of eastern religions, more from desperation than anything else. I credit her with getting me through my last year at the University of Maryland. Anyway, I struggled with life, lost my religion, adopted yoga, and went through what could only be called a very dark night of the soul. In 1969 I came into theosophy and corresponded with Jim Long, the leader of the Pasadena Society, who had also once been a Christian Scientist. His letters helped me, and somewhere in 1970 I came out of my funk and became a human being again (I have written about this, including Long's letters to me, in a book called Dear Companion, but it is yet unpublished. Grace Knoche liked it, but wouldn't publish it, preferring some other publisher but I haven't found one yet). However, it is only now that I realize the period from 1963 to 1970 is seven years! Is this a coincidence? I don't know, but I now have a lot more respect for Eldon's statement and for the number seven. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 17:30:34 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Sex and Reincarnation There are two difficult subjects that I feel we, as theosophists, need to discuss, if possible. I am not sure that we can, because both are sensitive, and I fear that few theosophists really understand what I have tried to say about these two subjects over the years. Also, everyone seems to be terribly opinionated on both subjects. I am talking about sex and reincarnation. I have been scorned and ridiculed on the first, and ignored on the second. So be it. Yet I feel compelled to try one more time. Let me briefly outline my thoughts, and if I am still too far in left field, I promise to shut up. Sex. I have an impression that theosophists are puritanical about sex. Is this true, or simply a false feeling? Virtually all theosophical writers from HPB to G de P have implied that celibacy is a holy and necessary condition to tread the Path. Sex is dirty, or at least unclean, and only condoned in marriage. In short, theosophists view sex much like Catholicism. Is this true? What is everyone's view on this? I would like to take a pole though I find most won't even talk about it. As probably everyone knows, I have a different view on sex. I don't extol it, but I don't extol celibacy either. I believe that sexual indulgence and celibacy are two extremes, and that the best position to take is somewhere in between. However, I respect the view of others who desire to go to either extreme (whatever floats your boat, as my daughter would say). However, it seems to me that theosophists are uneasy even talking about sex. The recent Leadbeater controversy on Theos-l about "self abuse" is a good example. Why do I care? Because I believe that such a viewpoint is destined for trouble. I see otherwise good theosophists cruising down a river with some very large rocks ahead of them and I feel the need to give fair warning to them. I have elsewhere described what I have called "sexual currents" that exist on every Globe of our planetary chain, and I believe that we all must face these, sooner or later. We probably already have. Anyone facing such a current with a puritanical outlook will flounder as will anyone with sexual appetites or lust. This is very much like a puritan having a very sensual sexual dream at night. In the old days such a person would have concluded that he or she must have encountered a succubus or an incubus and thus was an innocent victim. Today we know that such demons exist only in our own minds. Sexual desire is a demon indeed. And it feeds on puritanism. If a celibate has sexual desires, then their celibacy is a sham. Theosophists should look to their nightly dreams as barometers to measure where they are. Don't expect your devachan to be any better than your nightly dreams. Don't expect to leave sex behind when you "become spiritual." Don't think that sex can ever be outgrown or overcome. Reincarnation. I no longer fear death, so much as rebirth. Personally, I have no desire to be reborn, and hope that I do not, except perhaps in the sense of returning to help others, which I perceive as a responsibility or duty rather than a pleasurable thing to look forward to. Reincarnation stinks. It is an endless wheel of sorrow. I am tired of it. There is little on this earth that I find attractive except insofar as it is a manifestation of something higher. This is one of the things that I really like about Buddhism - that reincarnation is an endless wheel of sorrow and suffering and mayavic adventure. But I have not found a single theosophist or theosophical writer who shares in this Buddhist attitude. Buddhism teaches that the Earth is a world of suffering and promises an Eightfold Way out of it. Wicca (which is very popular these days and perhaps the only religion that is founded on the inherent equality of women) teaches that the Earth is divine and that reincarnation is a gift from the Goddess and a joyous occasion that we should look forward to. I think (please tell me if I am wrong here) that theosophy teaches something in between these two extremes. Here too we see the importance of sex. During the downward Arc of Descent femininity is emphasized and the Earth is manifested and seen as good. During the Arc of Ascent masculinity is emphasized and the Earth is spiritualized and its physicality and mortality are seen as bad. All masculine religions emphasize the goodness of spirit (male/solar) at the expense of the material (female/lunar). All feminine religions emphasize the goodness of the material (female/lunar), which is seen as being the Womb of the Goddess, and downplay the spiritual path (male/solar) as escapism. Where are theosophists on this point? If theosophy is truly a religion, then is it masculine or feminine, or some combination of the two? Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 05:19:24 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: sex and reincarnation Jerry S. Concerning your message on sex and reincarnation, I'm essentially in agreement with you. People had scorned and ridiculed you for these opinions? What is the world coming to? Like you, I have also observed that most theosophists are very puritanical about sex. My story about the member who couldn't handle the vocalization of the word "penis" is my classic example. Though H.P.B. and Purucker at least imply that celibacy is a "holy and necessary condition to tread the path," I feel that the message may have been distorted by the listeners. H.P.B. also points out that nothing is gained (and perhaps damage is done) by repressing one's sexual nature to become celibate. I feel this celibacy stuff was directed to people who wish to tread the path, and have already transcended or are in a position to transcend their libidal nature. There are a few people like that. I have met a few of them, but they are more the exception than the rule. For the rest of us who have the normal range of passions, I think there are a lot of spiritual lessons to be learned in the school of family relations and marriage. Though Theosophists seem to be in a time warp, and live a victorian morality and code of ethics, I believe that the Leadbeater issue goes much deeper than a reluctance to talk about "self abuse." The initial accusations against Leadbeater, were just surface issues to a much deeper and more complex story. There appears to be an underlying fear that the whole story concerning Leadbeater will someday become public, and it will bring to light some details that will put the whole Theosophical Society of that era into a very different light. Tillett made public some of these details at the Theosophical History conference in San Diego, and created a rather nasty reaction from Wheaton that reverberated all the way to Adyar. The Theosophical Society is in a sense like a living entity. An Organization, like people, can become pathological. Like people, It can have repressed traumas, that it refuses to acknowledge. And like traumas in humans, they will sit quietly for years, then suddenly resurface again and again. Each time they are pushed back under, just like people do with repressed memories. One therapeutic technique for releasing these traumas, is to allow them to come to the surface, so that they can be faced. In Jungian terminology, it is called "embracing the shadow side." But this is very scary--and feels a little like being sent to room "101" in the book 1984. We do have I think, one instance where this purging was begun in the Adyar Society. It began with the publication of CANDLES IN THE SUN in the 1950's. The book, written by an insider, gave a "too revealing" inside view of the Krishnamurti years, there was quite an outcry of pain among the membership. But at least the truth was out. When KRISHNAMURTI, THE YEARS OF AWAKENING came out twenty years later, covering the same ground, the outcry was much less, even though the second book was much more revealing than the first. In other words, it is through bringing these repressed traumas to the surface and out in the open, the healing process begins. The Theosophical Society today is beginning to come to terms with the Krishnamurti issue. Discussion on this subject is no longer as upsetting to people as it once was. The Leadbeater issue is still too sensitive, however. Perhaps in another ten years, with the publication of another history, the T.S. may begin to try to come to terms with it. Perhaps, someday the T.S. might even be able to deal with the Judge case. However, the Adyar T.S. isn't the only Society with repressed issues. All the Theosophical Organizations have them, and I'm afraid none have handled their situations any better than the Adyar Society. Regarding reincarnation. I understand the theosophical teachings as portraying a system of Divine Law, that has little to do with human justice or morality. Our planet is a school of learning, and the home for a long chain of existences for our reincarnating egos, but mortality for our personalities. In a way, this view embraces both the Buddhist view of a world of suffering (from the view of our personal selves), and a divinity that is within all there is. Reincarnation is part of divine law, which is not going to change whether we rejoice in, or grieve its reality. Regarding the number seven. My experience has also been that my life changes in seven year cycles. I can follow and predict these changes simply by following the transit of the planet Saturn as it hits critical points in my horoscope. We are near the same age (and have had similar life experiences) and our Saturns are well into their second cycle. I'm told that the ride is easier the second time around. Arvind Did you receive my message through John Mead? Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 13:28:58 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: going behind the words When we are faced with our theosophical books from one day to the next, the thought may come: what do we do with this stuff? A newcomer may ask us the same question. And what is our answer? We come to the books and have learned to properly study them. We have read the classics, and underlined our favorite quotes. We have held classes for others to study Theosophy. We can properly cite what we may tell others, knowing where to find our references. We are good scholars of the literature. This is, though, but the first step. It is an important one, for the use of the intellect is necessary for futher progress in understanding the Mystery Teachings. But there is much more to do. If we stay with the brain-mind learning, we stare into a wall, a barrier, something that prevents further progress. We can read about Theosophy and learn all the various words, and their typical meanings. But we also must believe what we read, to treat it as real, to *do what it says*! You can come in touch with your own inner teacher and learn from within too! Although it is easy *to pretend*, when not really doing so, this does not mean that doing so is unreal or is not possible. Anyone can be a chela if their intent is right, if they try to lead an impersonal life of selfless service, if they awaken their inner buddhic light. And this can begin now! It does not require them to be at the final stages of human personal evolution. Some would deify the Masters, to make them into superphysical beings, would deny all personal characteristics to them. Some may even want to make their Messangers, like H.P.B., into persons of extraordinary refinement. If you look at her, though, as a real, historic personage, and not through the idealized representations that some make of her, you see a person who was far from plesant, someone who smoke and swore and had a bad temper. The occult status of H.P.B. was not a result of any particular characteristic of her personality, but rather because of her ability to function in the impersonal, of her ability to devote her life to selfless service of humanity. We might also hear some people make of chelas and chelaship a thing of almost superphysical, comic-book hero status, and deny that *we* could possible undergo it ourselves. Again, they look at the outer surface of people, the crust, and see not the inner man! We cannot measure anyone's spiritual status based upon how pious they are in living out the external rules of a particular religion or philosophy. The light of the inner nature is not revealed in the outer form. The outer nature relates to the normal sweep of evolution, the human ego as a part of human lifewave, and not to the other side of things. The other side of the dual track of life is the Hierarchy of Compassion, the path of Looking Back, of reaching to those behind oneself and assisting them, rather than simply moving forward and attaining one's own personal progress. The words that we read in our books are sometimes evasive, they are hard to pin down. Some words are used in different senses and with different meanings. At times, a term is used to describe different aspects of the same thing. At other times, a term might be used to describe two different things. Now, have we really tried to set our books down and ask *inside* for more Teachings, for a better understanding, for a deeper insight? We read that such is possible, but do we *believe* and *try*? Do we have a faith in the Teachings that is unshakable, founded in our experience of trying them, of using them, of making them a part of our lives? Or do we content ourselves to remember good quotes and stay within the mental blinders of western academic and scientific thought? What we read about chelaship is as real, as close, as available to be tried in our lives as anything we might read on diet, exercize, or popular psychology. It is unreal but to those who would not know, those who would not behold it, those who would not admit it into their lives. We learn to live in our spiritual natures, to always orient ourselves *true north*, like a good compass. When the unexpected events of life knock us off track, we do not stay misdirected for long, but always set ourselves aright. We always get up when knocked down in live, and never give up. No error, no mistake, no shortcoming holds you back. By dwelling in the spiritual, the personality is illuminated from within and the lower nature will transform itself without a sense of struggle. There will be growth pains, from the hastened development, but these are happy pains, like those pains that come when doing something that we totally enjoy. We do not really have a sense of how difficult our spiritual growth really is, we do not suffer. *Suffering is a state of mind,* which comes from a sense of personal self. The personal self has lost something, and it suffers. We feel no suffering, though, for we dwell in the impersonal, in the selfless, in a far grander part of our natures! There is a saying: seize the day! We take the raw materials of life, the yet-unwritten page in the book of life that is today, and fill it with the highest, with the noblest that we can. We do not do this by denial of the personality. We do not do it by rejection, by supression, by manipulation of the personal self. We rather do it by drawing in the higher nature, by ennobling what we do by giving it a sense of the divinity behind things, by infilling our activities by an awareness and *presence* of the mystery behind outer things. The process of chelaship is not a commonplace thing. It does not come about by a mere wanting, without the necessary understanding and readiness. We can observe many pretenders, many who would let us think that they are chelas or masters. These are people who may fool themselves and a few followers, but can be seen through, when we have the necessary keys given us, by the core concepts of Theosophy. The relationship between chela and teacher is hidden, silent, not talked about. The very spiritual qualities that enable one to become a chela would have to be absent were he to use his chelaship for personal recognition or benefit. Chelaship is not grand in terms of personal honor, recognition, status, but grand in terms of impersonal sacrifice, of working to benefit others without any element of self or self-benefit. We loose ourselves in action, become infilled with it, and become something grander in the process. Those qualities of the spiritual nature that are alive and in action in our lives, *in addition to* the activities of the personality, are what sends out a call, what draws the attention of the Masters draws us into their circle, that draws us into the Work. We must take what we have in our literature. We must treat it as real and *do it*. It is only unreal to the extent that we do not respect its reality, to the extent that we do not allow the Teachings to become a part of our lives. Getting to the heart of Theosophy is not just defining what are the right books to read, the right authors to study, the accurate publication and distribution of the literature, in verbatim form, unaltered in terms of the mere printed words. We are responsible to pass on the Truths as we have received them. And we have received them not in the physical books, in the paper that we hold in our hands. We have received them as an oral and living tradition. We have received the heart, the essence, the true nature of the Esoteric Philosophy in our inner natures, as an illumination that has arisen due to our studies and our teaching of what we have learned. It is this illumination, *along with the accurate words*, that we are responsible to faithfully pass on. The books veil the Teachings, but are not the Teachings in themselves. We stand, though, in our study of the literature, before them, and it is up to us to pull aside the veil or forever stand outside. We can drink from the fountain of Truth and thirst no more, or refuse. We have come far, our fourtune has brought us but one step removed from our goal, the goal of entering a higher life. Let us take that last step and find that we too can be chelas, that chelaship is not for the unknowable few, but for anyone whose hearts and minds are ready and willing to be of service. The idea that we are held back because we *have not tried hard enough* is wrong. It is not a matter of trying *harder*. It is just a matter of trying, really trying, and not stopping to try. The power of the will is not based upon *quantity*, not based upon energy level, not based upon having more of anything. The power is the unyielding resolve to keep at it. We are subject to mistakes. But combine the persistence of an unshakable determination with the continual awareness of the spiritual, as a pervasive background to our experience of life, and we simply cannot fail! We can experience setbacks, short-run failures, but in the long run, we will attain our goal, and become a living force for good in the world! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1993 15:50:38 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: could we be chelas? When we read the materials authored by students of Theosohy, we may wonder how, at times, some of us may talk or write a certain way. How can someone write in a way that speaks of chelaship as something that can be personally known, perhaps, even, by the writer himself? Could some writers be chelas? Who are they to dare imply such a thing? Should we ask them directly the question? Don't we have a right to know, to help us properly evaluate how we should consider what they write? Consider, for a moment, what this question would mean. If you were to say that you are a chela, then there's a good change that you're really a pretender. It may vary with circumstances, but the general rule to to stay silent about such things. If you deny that you are, then you are either lying about it, or are really a pretender. It seems that there is no good way to answer this question, because it relates to things that must not be spoken of. If any of us were to answer this question, we would have to look at ourselves, and make a judgement. We would be brought to think of ourselves in terms of the personality, drawing our attention away from the spiritual, and think in a way that may strengthen our sense of personal self. There are things about oursevles that we can know or sense, things about which it would be inadvisable, which it would be premature to put into words. Like dating someone new, where there is a growing relationship, it can harm things to try to formulate and define the nature of the relationship early on, rather than leaving it unnamed, formless, in a formulative stage. We should allow our relationship to our inner teachers to ripen and reach term, to reach a distinct nature not as a result of the activity of the brain-mind, Kama-Manas, but rather let it take on shape due to the affect of our being continually active in our spiritual natures. We should let our higher activity give it shape, form, and definition in our lives, and not try to fashion it according to any preconceptions fo what or how we might think that it should be. In the early stages of this love with the Inner Beloved, we should do nothing to sour the relationship. We should not try to fashion, shape, control it. And to define it too neatly in our minds would do just that! There is a difference, though, between wanting chelaship, and actually experiencing it, in having it happen in our lives. How do we engage the process, how do we start it, how do we let it begin in our lives? First a belief, a strong belief, then perfect assurance, then a sound basis in the philosohpy, an active participation in selfless work with some degree of success, and by self-assertion or self-invocation. But this *self*, of course, is not the personal self! We must share all that is given us, yet remain, paradoxically, silent about the secrets that we learn. We play life by different rules than those based upon personal self-development. We may even be worse off in the personality, since we have much less time and energy to devote to self-cultivation. We now give a helping hand to others in their climb, rather than taking the next step ourselves. Our individual progress might be said to have stopped after our period of probation, it may have come to a standstill for this lifetime. There is not any claim to superiority or greatness. The statement made, rather, is that one's personal progress has stopped so that he may help others. One has devoted his life to service. Our family and friends, the people that we meet, may develop personally much farther than we do in this life. They may learn more, experience more, live far richer lives than we do. But we are rooted more deeply in the heart of life itself, and have our own reward. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 05:58:33 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: AAB and HPB Greetings Arvind! I'm glad you finally got my message. I've tried from both Peacenet and Internet but they bounce back with "User unknown." John says that the trouble is on your end. Perhaps you could advise the accounts or help dept. at "ericsson" (who ever that is) of the problem. David Reigle would be happy to hear from you. Mention my name by way of introduction if you would like. Dave is one of a circle of theosophical researchers that have popped up over the years, and the only one among us at this time with skills in translating Tibetan. He keeps very busy however, so you may not get a quick response. Regarding books. I have available *everything* that is published by TSA, and the other theosophical publishers. I also carry every book in print that was mentioned in the Secret Doctrine, including ESOTERIC BUDDHISM. Further, I carry all of AAB's writings in paper bound, and Saradarayan's books, but haven't been stocking these topical compilations of AAB's writings that have come out lately. I haven't had the Helena Roerich books for a while because of lack of interest, but could get them again. I also have a lot of other things that are germane, but from other publishers, in such areas as astrology, hermetica, magic etc. My main interest however, is in out of print books in these areas, and I publish out of print book catalogues one or twice a year. I don't want to put price lists out over theos-l, because I feel that it is a misuse of the bulletin board, but I'm happy to respond to any inquiries. I went back to Brenda's quote: S.D Vol. I, xxxviii: "In Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far better fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom to give final and irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called *Gupta- Vidya; and that, like the once-mysterious source of the Nile, the source of all religions and philosophies now known to the world has been for many ages forgotten and lost to men, but is at last found." Are you sure this is the quote you had in mind? You did say it was in the middle of the book, not the beginning. Also there is no mention of a psychological key or of three types of fire here. Is their another quote in the middle of the book we should be looking at? The problem with the above quote is that Purucker and Steiner also claim to be the person described here. Do you feel that AAB was "more informed and far better fitted" than HPB? Do you feel that AAB give "final and *irrefutable proofs* of the existence of a science called Gupta-Vidya," (i.e. Divine Wisdom) and made known the "source of all religions and philosophies now known to the world"? The problem is that followers of both Steiner and Purucker would answer in the affirmative to this, so this quote isn't very helpful to single out AAB. In fact, I think I can add others to this list who claim to be the person predicted here. I'm more interested in the more specific quote you said that you saw in the S.D. that says that a disciple will provide the psychological key. What troubles me with this statement, is that HPB discusses seven keys in the SD in different places (I can give you the references if you are interested), and never mentions a "psychological key." Yet she definitely names *seven* keys. This is why I'm anxious to find this quote, because I have never seen mentioned a "psychological key," and I have never seen any statements that there are other keys. Please explain. Yes I have all of AAB's and HPB's books. My library is very extensive. I also have scattered early issues of the BEACON, and am interested in putting together a complete set. I'm glad the hear of your friend joining the group. I can hold my own on HPB references, but don't know AAB well enough, so I depend on you for these. Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 16:13:05 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: keep looking behind the words In a theosophical class, a topic may be hotly discussed. Everyone is contributing their ideas. There may not be general agreement on the truth of the matter. Many different viewpoints are being exchanged. And then, someone opens up "Isis Unveiled" and gives a H.P.B. quote. There is a dramatic silence, and everyone appears to concur. Does this happen in your theosophical group? How is the discussion kept true to Theosophy and yet kept living, alive, directly chasing the greater truths? How do we keep the right direction, yet cut loose to the chase? How can we stay true to the Teachings yet really delve into them, to go after them on their own ground? One statement that we find Blavatsky to have made is that some disciple in the twentieth century may be sent forth by the Masters to give final, irrefutable proofs of the science of Gupta Vida, the Esoteric Philosophy. Let's consider what this statement means. First, we have a possible task, something that *may* be done. This is not biblical prophecy, something that is predestined according to some inflexible plan, a plan laid out in ages past that cannot be altered and does not change according to the actual events of life, as they happen. Things change. So do the plans of men. And, I'd say, so also do the plans of the Masters. We are talking, in this quote, about a possible task, a single project, a single thing for one or a few people to be concerned about making happen. This task, of providing proof of the Wisdom Teachings, of providing irrefutable proof, has, itself, to be considered, as to what it means. In "The Mahatma Letters," we read of how the Masters did not want to give Sinnett final, irrefutable proof about their existence, or about the Occult Sciences. He had asked for, but was refused, a copy of the daily "The London Times", so that he could show without question that the phenomena was valid. They preferred to not do so. What kind of proof of the Gupta Vidya might be given, and to whom? Certainly, a majority of mankind is not ready for such, and would not accept any proof, however convincing. The proof, perhaps, was for *those with eyes to see*, that is, it was for students of Theosophy. This proof would wrap up the purpose of the book "The Secret Doctrine," and show how prevasive the Wisdom Tradition was. The activities of the Masters in the world are not limited to the few things that we find mentioned in our theosohical books. And we can read how they are fallable, how they too can make mistakes. They will try experiments that will fail. Things do not always work out. Based upon an understanding of the philosohpy, we can infer by reason and intuition--not merely idle speculation--both the nature of life as well as the work of the Masters. We can do this, to a degree, limited by our own innate capacity, the reach of our own ability *to know*. We must not let ourselves come to the point where we are like fundamentalist Christians, where they say that if it's not in the Bible, then it cannot be true. We must not substitute "Theosophist" for "Christian" and "Secret Doctrine" for "Bible", and do the same thing! Consider the Masters. They have a stated purpose, an avowed intent in doing a particular project, a particular task or activity in the world. They can change their minds at any point of time, and this can be from their own change of heart, or from an unexpected turn to events in the world, where things are not working out as intended. If they say something in 1888, that does not mean that they would say the same thing a hundred years later. Putting everything to the test of H.P.B. quotes is an intellectual exercise that can be helpful. We need to continually reevaluate our thinking and see if we've gone astray. But we also need to put things to the test of *the philosophy*, to the test of an understanding that we have deep within ourselves, for we can readily misunderstand the quotes or overlook the truths behind them. An understanding of the actual Teachings is much more than an intellectual exercise, and requires us to originate the same thoughts, and more, from within. Someone can say: "Show me a quote to prove that statement." And it might very well be possible to do so. But not always. And we cannot deny that there is this wider field of study, apart from the quotes. The written texts are the *diving boards* off which we jump, not the bench we may sit on. If we are told that citations cannot be found to support a particular insight, or that only a weak case can be made when we weave together a dozen assorted passages, we are saying that there are no readily available words to help us arrive at the insight. The insight stands, if it is true, independent of any scholarly justification. The type of learning that we are talking about, the type of direct insight that we are seeking to foster, cannot be understood simply by describing how it works. We do not understand how to do it or what it really involves by describing it in psychological or metaphysical terms. We understand it, and greatly benefit from it, *by doing it*. We are told of Buddhi-Manas, higher Manas, our own faculty of knowing. It can be used. We can stand back and deny it, or say that it is too difficult, too advanced, say that we cannot try it because only one in a million may be ready, by saying that everyone talking about it are just pretenders or lost in some mayavic delusion. We can say all this, but we would be wrong. These are excuses for keeping on our own mental blinders, out of a sense, perhaps, of insecurity, of the insecurity that comes of venturing into uncharted waters. Try sitting down, with books closed, and be prepared to take notes. With pen in hand, see if you can write the outline of some genuine, substantial materials on the Esoteric Philosophy. With no references, no one to talk to, and no distractions, try to see what comes. You may be surprized! You may find that you've learned something that you did not know before. Mental clarity and scholarly accuracy are very important. We can come up with all sorts of untrue things through a mind that is without direction, that is directed by the emotional nature or psychic visions. Regarding books to study, I would include Purucker and the Point Loma books among those that I give serious attention to. This is since I would consider Purucker as a Teacher, and would expect that individuals of a certain temperament would be attracted to him. His being a Teacher does not preclude other Teachers, but I would not always be in a position where I could judge their validity. I can only speak for myself, where I find considerable value in the study of his works. Something else is needed, though, in addition to that clarity. We need a spiritual vision where we can *see* truth, and we must develop this vision by using it. If we realize a grand idea, we must not automatically say that it is not really theosophical, because we did not read it first. We may seek to read about it to study it more. But it is not automatically necessary to find a quote to authenticate the idea. The real support for an idea is by an inner *knowing* that it is true, a perception, and not from external sources. These uncharted waters are dangerous, though, and it is easy to lose one's way. Many try them and end up confused. It is easy to mix in much misunderstanding with the insights arrived at. These misunderstandings could have been cleared up by the continued study of the core concepts of Theosophy. The use of the intellect allows us a reality check, a compass that helps us keep our directions straight. The intellectual study of the Teachings is never over, though our progress depends upon much more than just that intellectual study. We are told to know, to dare, to will, and to keep silent. We are not really authorized to Teach, to directly reveal the deepest secrets that may come to us. Just because we have an insight does not mean it's a good time to open our mouths and tell others. The act of telling engenders karmic responsibilities that we may not want to take on. There may be many errors in the initial ideas, errors that we need to work out over years of study and contemplation. So it is best to share what we really know well, what we have made a part of ourselves, and leave the deepest that we know to grow within, in the silence. We should let our ideas grow to adulthood before we put them out into the world. These ideas that we arrive at form within our minds like crystals, objects of mathematical perfection and intrinsic beauty. They arise out of a rich sea of understanding, and can be admired and enjoyed. But they are impermanent, have when their time has come, they must be destroyed and replaced by yet other ideas. The validity of what we achieve in our contemplation is intrinsic. There is not a need, for us, to have an H.P.B. quote to approve, to sanction, to authorize it. It is only when we being to teach others, that we must stay close to what was already taught, or to what we really, truly know, what we've thoroughly mastered and made a part of our lives. We should observe the rule of silence regarding anything still too new to us, regarding things that we have not well mastered. Coming back to the "Secret Doctrine" quote regarding a Messanger to come in the twentieth century, we should remember that, quote or not, if it was necessary for others to follow and expand on or complete and round out H.P.B.'s work, they will come. We do not have to personally know a Master, or to be in direct communication with one, to understand something of them, and what they might be doing. What we know of them does not have to be limited to those quotes that everyone can agree are authoritative. We can also derive knowledge from an understanding and a direct application of the philosophy in our lives. We have a number of ism's to avoid, including psychism, materialism, and spiritualism. There's perhaps another, if we may coin a new word: cite-ism, the fixation on citations where they are seen as an end in themselves rather than the starting place for the study. Theosophy does not *stop at the quote*. It *starts at the quote*. It is not just something to read about, it should also be taken seriously as a reality in its own right and applied. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 16:28:30 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: AAB/HPB Jerry H-E, Many many thanks for your recent message. I noticed that you have carefully avoided answering some of my 'unfair' questions, 'unfair' in the sense that their answer potentially involve the expenditure of considerable energy and also, they are perhaps not readily suited to 'public' consumption. A few of them I am going to restate here in different words (in case you just missed them due to lack of 'emphasis' on my part or whatever): (a) Which books have influenced you the most? (b) What is your current spiritual 'practice' (to put it in different words, how do you incorporate the 'spiritual' into your daily living)? (c) What is your current 'station' (or 'occupation') in life, and what is your next step (or where are you going at the moment)? Answers to questions of the above type will help me (and perhaps others) greatly in getting a better understanding of where you are coming from, and where you are headed. Incidentally, there is a regular feature article in the TSA quarterly publication called the 'Quest' where these types of questions are answered regularly by renowned spiritual practitioners (the last issue of Quest has a wonderful feature on the last couple of pages by a Buddhist practitioner which I'd recommend everyone to read!) Also, as I was reading one of Eldon's recent articles where he has mentioned that the efforts of the Masters are many times not 'successful', the thought occurred to me that the three books by AAB containing DK's instructions to his disciples ('Discilpleship in the New Age' Volumes I and II, and 'Glamour, A World Problem') are a result of an experiment which He (DK) termed a failure! This comment ties into a previous comment that (I think) you had made indicating that HPB's Masters were fallible, whereas the Masters in other systems of esoteric studies are made to look like entirely 'failure-proof'. Another comment that I want to make is with reference to the quote from ML ('Mahatama Letters') attributed to KH containing DK's name ... the reason I cited that in my previous communication was that it is the very first time I saw a reference to DK's name by KH. DK has stated in the introductory pages of all of the books that He has written (I think it is called "Extract from a Statement by the Tibetan') that He helps out the Masters M and KH whenever needed, and this quote from KH indicates that He (KH) was indeed willing and able to use DK as the need arose. I realize that I will probably not be able to answer all of your questions/comments in this message but I have tried to answer as many of them as possible inside your message below. Have a great Weekend (I do not logon during weekends)! In Brotherhood and Unity, Arvind ---- > I'm glad you finally got my message. I've tried from both > Peacenet and Internet but they bounce back with "User unknown." > John says that the trouble is on your end. Perhaps you could > advise the accounts or help dept. at "ericsson" (who ever that > is) of the problem. I have asked some of my colleagues about this problem. What I have myself experienced is that many times I am not able to send a message out to certain destinations 'nodes' which are restricted by our MIS department. I'll try to follow up some more on this but it appears to me that the problem could be at your end since a number of others in different cities (everyone except you) have been able to send me messages at exuaxk@exu.ericsson.se. You know that the 'se' in this address stands for Sweden, and perhaps the system administrator of your node has restricted access to messages going to Sweden. > > David Reigle would be happy to hear from you. Mention my > name by way of introduction if you would like. Dave is one of a > circle of theosophical researchers that have popped up over the > years, and the only one among us at this time with skills in > translating Tibetan. He keeps very busy however, so you may not > get a quick response. I hope to write to David sometime in the future. If you have a phone number for him, that will be great (much quicker to call than write)! What is the latest on discovering the book or document called 'Stanzas of Dzyan'? It'd be great to get access to the complete work some day! > Regarding books I have available *everything* that is > published by TSA, and the other theosophical publishers I also > carry every book in print that was mentioned in the Secret > Doctrine, including ESOTERIC BUDDHISM. Further, I carry all of > AAB's writings in paper bound, and Saradarayan's books, but > haven't been stocking these topical compilations of AAB's > writings that have come out lately. I haven't had the Helena > Roerich books for a while because of lack of interest, but could > get them again. I also have a lot of other things that are > germane, but from other publishers, in such areas as astrology, > hermetica, magic, etc. My main interest however, is in out of > print books in these areas, and I publish out of print book > catalogues one or twice a year. I don't want to put price lists > out over theos-l, because I feel that it is a misuse of the > bulletin board, but I'm happy to respond to any inquiries. > For your information, Lucis trust has two compilations ready to go into the publishers, one on the 7 Rays ("Saptarishi') and the other on the 7th Ray in particular. I do not think that you can order them just now but I can let you know when I come to know about their availability. BTW can I ask you for a copy of your most recent catalog? My address is 3024 Landershire Ln, Plano TX 75023-800824. I guarantee to buy at least some of the books from you sometime soon! Regarding Helena Roerich's books ... they are regarded very highly by most Bailey students and also by Lucis Trust. Immediately when I found out about the Bailey books some five years ago, I ordered (in great enthusiasm) ALL of the books written by Bailey and Helena Roerich--I did not order all of Blavatsky's books because Lucis does not sell them. These Roerich books (published by the Agni Yoga Society) are supposed to have been dictated by the Master Morya. Frankly I have not gotten around to reading even a single one of these Roerich books so far (but it is one of my aims to be able to read them at least once during this lifetime!) Have you read any of these, and do you have any comments/guidelines on a 'reading program for potential theosophists'? > I went back to Brenda's quote: S.D Vol. I, xxxviii: "In > Century the Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far better > fitted, may be sent by the Masters of Wisdom to give final and > irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called *Gupta- > Vidya; and that, like the once-mysterious source of the Nile, the > source of all religions and philosophies now known to the world > has been for many ages forgotten and lost to men, but is at last > found." > > Are you sure this is the quote you had in mind? You did say > it was in the middle of the book, not the beginning Also there > is no mention of a psychological key or of three types of fire > here. Is their another quote in the middle of the book we should > be looking at? The problem with the above quote is that Purucker > and Steiner also claim to be the person described here. Do you > feel that AAB was "more informed and far better fitted" than HPB? > Do you feel that AAB give "final and *irrefutable proofs* of the > existence of a science called Gupta-Vidya," (i.e. Divine Wisdom) > and made known the "source of all religions and philosophies now > known to the world"? The problem is that followers of both > Steiner and Purucker would answer in the affirmative to this, so > this quote isn't very helpful to single out AAB. In fact, I > think I can add others to this list who claim to be the person > predicted here I'm more interested in the more specific quote > you said that you saw in the S.D. that says that a disciple will > provide the psychological key What troubles me with this > statement, is that HPB discusses seven keys in the SD in > different places (I can give you the references if you are > interested), and never mentions a "psychological key." Yet she > definitely names *seven* keys This is why I'm anxious to find > this quote, because I have never seen mentioned a "psychological > key," and I have never seen any statements that there are other > keys. Please explain. I asked around at Lucis Trust yesterday if they had any page reference numbers to quotes from SD (or any of the other HPB books). They did not, at least they could not help me on the spot I started reading the SD before we started these discussions and as I have admitted before, indeed I do not remember where the quote about the psychological key to SD is in HPB's SD. I will keep looking but I do wish to thank Brenda. Eldon for providing the page reference to at least one of the quotes that I was looking for. I do not know whether AAB was better fitted than HPB (no doubt in my mind that they were both great Initiates), it appears that the Hierarchy uses anyone who has the right 'equipment' -- even a beginner on the probationary path can be used if the purpose can be served. > Yes I have all of AAB's and HPB's books. My library is very > extensive I also have scattered early issues of the BEACON, and > am interested in putting together a complete set. > > I'm glad the hear of your friend joining the group. I can hold > my own on HPB references, but don't know AAB well enough, so I > depend on you for these. Yes, I have managed to establish e-mail with Lucis Trust through the Peacenet. (I'll send you a copy of an e-mail I got from them via Peacenet, perhaps you'll try 'cutting and pasting' my address from that post to see if you can e-mail directly to me). I suggested that one of them join theos-l, and they promised to look into it but they are very short staffed and extremely busy so I do not know when or if they will choose to use this opportunity. > Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 15:51:31 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: rising about the psychological It is important to maintain balance and perspective in life. But the rules change when we become aware of the higher life. When we realize and start working with our higher natures, we come to see our personalities as vehicles of something grander within, and no longer as what we'd consider to be our conscious selves. A psychological approach to live would tell us to stay personality centered. It would have us keep our awareness in the personality and experience everything in life in terms of how it relates to that shadowy image of self which we have made. We are told to not lose this orientation. We must keep the personality as our seat of consciousness. If we were to identify with something bigger than it, we would be told that we are experiencing "inflation", with perhaps destructive psychological consequences. But is this true? The description of someone experiencing inflation is not flattering. There is often a puny, undeveloped person, someone whom has neglected life, someone clinging onto an external sense of grandness to compensate for the lack of proper psychological growth and maturity. This use of the word *maturity* is funny, though, because the psychologist is oblivious to what could be called *true maturity,* the ripening, the flowering, the fullness of development of the spiritual nature, which comes from countless lifetimes of training, lifetimes of sacrifice, lifetimes of devoted service to the spiritual. We *can* be infilled with the higher, and have it as our seat of consciousness, and not be neglecting the personality. And it may or may not appear as inflation. Any temporary inflation in the personality would just be one of the temporary adjustments made in life during the period of probation, something that if it came at all would be gone long before the seven years were up. Now it is possible for certain flaws in the personality to emerge that might not have otherwise appeared. This is from the quickening of karma, from the expansion of the experiences that are coming to us in life. We are rewroking the personality to be a better instrument, and yet have less time and energy to spend on its self-cultivation. There may even appear *gaps* in the personality, as well, and these are to let in something higher into our lives. We are devoting our attention, our awareness, our consciousness to selfless service, to universal love, and to the grandest of philosophy, and are just *somewhere else*. There are people whom wish to escape the petty nature of life, to free themselves from the aweful oppressive feeling of existence in a heavy, burdensome, grossly-material personality, a personality that is sickened by the weight of material existence and selfishness. They pretend, they make believe, they imagine and play at being something else, something bigger, but do not fool themselves very well. They carry with themselves a feeling of horror, of shame, of unreality, of failure that brings a sense of pain to the daily events of life. This feeling is the opposite of what we train ourselves. We bring the opposite into play, filling the background of our lives with hope, with accomplishment, with reality, with success, with bliss, that brightens our lives and the lives of those around us! We too want to escape the sense of personal self, since it is the cause of suffering, and seek the bliss of transcending it. We also shift our attention away from the person that we are, from our personality. But this does not mean that we do not wish to care for it, to imporve it, to broaden and enlighten and infill it with the light of the spirit. We care for the personality, it is an important element of our nature and we give it its due respect. Transcending the personality does not happen by pretense, by make believe. It is not done by calling oneself something. We do not become greater by comparison to others, by putting down other people nor by finding things to call ourselves that make us seem greater. Nothing is gained by status, recognition, by symbols or external trappings that merely provide ego gratification. If we feel different, special, better than others, if we feel we are somehow set apart, in a special group, if we feel that we have some particular characteristic that makes us superior, then *that feeling* is our biggest enemy. Anything that pulls us out of our communion with our inner nature, and makes us self-aware of being particular personalities, apart from others, is a barrier to our progress. We become the higher nature by doing it, by living it, by making life an expression of it. And this comes by forgetting self, not by magnifying the sense of self, not by felling bigger, better, higher than others. Inflation is the psychological term for an abnormal sense of self, where one feels hs is bigger, better, vaster than he really is. It is a dream, a delusion, a dysfunction of personality. Were a little girl to put on her Mom's clothes, and say she was grown up, and were she to truly believe it, she would be fooling herself. An egotist needs to feel that he is better than others in some way. A member of some new age group may need to be told, and to believe, that he is very advanced spiritually, far above the common man. A preacher may believe that his opinion is really the word of God. There are countless ways that we can fool ourselves, that we can associate with something bigger and identify with it and use that indentification as an escape from the duties and lessons of life. Feeling special, unique, superior because of having some unique possession, or having some rare attribute of personality, be it physical beauty, wealth, a strong mind, abnormal psychical development, is a failure, a failure of the spiritual nature to make its presence felt. We are centered in the personality, grasping for things to incorporate into it, strengthening the sense of personal self, and attempting to take in and claim personal ownership of things that are simply greater than ourselves. And we become inflated, swept away in a delusion! We can, though, be infilled with the higher, with the real, the true, the ever-present spiritual reality about us. And this is not delusional, it does not lead to inflation. We are not focusing on the personal, centered in the personality, and it therefore does not puff up like a balloon with a sense of self-importance. As we shift our focus away from the personal, as we establish our seat of consciousness higher within, the spiritual passes through us, permeating us, but we attempt in no way to personally contain it. Looking at someone on the spiritual path, we may see more personal problems than the average person. As he cultivates the spiritual and works out karma, his life becomes fuller, and he has much less time for personal cultivation. He is busy helping others rather than perfecting himself. Having personal problems is not a sign that we have taken the wrong path. We may end up less beautiful, less healthy, less normal psychologically, poorer, more misuderstood--many of the outer aspects of our personal self may decline. There is no guarantee which way they will change when we enter probation. And it really does not matter. Something wonderful is at work, though, something wonderful within our natures, for we are really much more than is readily apparent. We are much more than the personality that we use, the personality that currently houses us as human egos on our earth, on Globe D. There is a certain holiness, a spiritual peace, a strength of heart, a inner wisdom that is special, unique, and transcends anything that we could possibly have attained through personal self-cultivation. The higher principles are beginning to be active in our lives, and their affects are starting to show. As we start along that path which will one day lead to our becoming forces for good in the world, we may or may not fit in well with our particular culture. We may sometimes be unknown, othertimes be an outcast or misfit, and at others have fame and honor bestowed upon us. We have reached the stage, though, where it does not matter to us; we are unaffected by worldly acclaim. For we serve the work, the order, the plan, the Law of Compassion, and we function from a higher seat of concsiousness within ourselves. Psychology may still describe the workings of our personalities, and from a merely psychological point of view we may be worse off in how we function. But we are operating from a higher level of consciousness and see life from a vista, a wide panorama of which the personality-centered people are blind. Others may look at us and see malfunctions of the personality, with poerhaps some nice side effects, and miss entirely what is going on. The personality was evolved forth as a carrier, a vehicle, as a means to hold and express our true nature, our real self, and not to function as a thing in its own right. It is this functioning, apart from the spritual nature, that is the true malfunctioning of the personality. It is the lack of the inner light, as a guide, to the personal life, that allows the personality to not function according to its intended purpose. We must not get caught up in psychology, although a minimal psychological health is necessary to be functional, it is not an end in itself. Like maintaining minimal physical health, it is useful, but life should be no more devoted to body building, and centered around the gym, than to psyche-building, centered around the therapist. A doctor is seen if we are in poor physical health. And we may see a psychologist if necessary to keep ourselves functional in our materialistic western society. But let's find ourselves those doctors and healers whom have open hearts, developed inner natures that allow them to treat the whole man. The importance of psychology is not denied, no more is the importance of physiology. But let us not dwell on the physical self, and picture ourselves a bodies of meat, nor dwell on the psychological self, and picture ourselves as a bundle of needs, a living kamarupa. Let us, instead, dwell in the highest, in the holy, the spiritual, the grand side of life. Let us keep the highest present in our lives as we go about the day, from waking until we drop off to sleep at night. Let us awaken to the rich sea of beauty that all of live is bathed in, be infilled with it, and become a thing of beauty ourselves, as we give expression to it in our lives. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 17:33:31 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: Leadbeater, Bailey. To Jerry HE and Arvind I eagerly await your discussion comparing HPB and AAB. Please hurry up already. I correspond with some folks who see no diff- erence and since I've read very little AAB, I'm curious to know what you folks have discovered. Bye. Nancy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 17:48:35 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: Leadbeater and Svabhavat This is from Nancy to Jerry HE I can't shed light on the philosophical discussion on swabhava or swabhavat, but I studied Sanskirt for a while, and you can pretty much ignore the ending as probably not being significant to the meaning of the word. Sanskrit has no separate prepositions (to,from, etc) instead, it changes the ending of the nouns to agree with quantity, gender and case. Case endings take the place of prepositions. Karma and Karman is a good example. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 17:59:03 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: Sex and Reincarnation to Jerry S from Nancy Good for you for raising these issues. SEX -- yes, the subject is destined to purse lips and raise eyebrows. There is a lot of Victorianism in theosophy and we need to separate the cultuaral baggage from the univeral principles. I'm a middle of the roader myself, not being a chela or monkess(?) . I am curious about sexual energy in general however and am curious about theosophical references you may have that speaks to it. REINCARNATION N -- I believe it is said that Atman and Buddhi never fully incarnate, we are taught that the lower quartenary disintegrates. If higher manas hangs out with Atman and Buddhi, and if lower manas hangs out with the lower quartenary, what really REINCARNATES anyway? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1993 21:02:33 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Archives Update - GASSHO added Hi -- Thanks to Arvind, we now have the first issue of GASSHO in our Theos-L Archives and FTP library! GASSHO is a new electronic publication concerning Buddhist Studies. I believe they intend to put out 6 issues a year (we have the Nov-Dec 1993 issue -- first issue). to retrieve this publication send e-mail to listserv at listserv@char.vnet.net with the message (command) of: GET THEOS-L gassho.1293 You can also use anonymous FTP to retrieve it from the vnet.net directory /pub/theos-l/gassho.1293 Peace -- John E. Mead ---| --- ---| ---| | | --- | | | | | | | | | | -- |---| |--- |--- |---| | | | | | | | | | | | | ---- | | |--- |--- | | |___| GASSHO! Electronic Journal of DharmaNet International and the Global Online Sangha GASSHO (ISSN: ####-####) is a bimonthly electronic journal seeking to promote communications and community amongst Buddhist scholars, laypractitioners, monks and nuns. GASSHO is a non-sectarian publication and does not represent any particular school of Buddhism. GASSHO publishes from time to time all of the following varieties of articles: Historical, analytical or other scholarly articles relating to Buddhism, or issues concerning Buddhism Dharma talks by acknowledged teachers from any Buddhist tradition Interviews with Buddhist teachers and scholars Translations of canonical Buddhist texts and/or commentary News items relevant to Buddhism and Buddhists Discussions of issues relevant to Buddhist practice and ethics News and discussions pertaining to DharmaNet International and the role of the electronic medium in Buddhism Reviews of books, journals, videos, tapes, performances, art, retreats, dharma centers, softwares, or any other resource having some direct bearing on or benefit to Buddhists Directory of online Buddhist resources International calendar of events noteworthy to the global sangha Survey articles reporting the state of the art in some area(s) of study. These may be done in the form of a literature review or annotated bibliography Letters to the editor Advertisements of immediate interest to our audience: grants available; positions available; study opportunities; etc. We are aiming at November 1, 1993 as our release date for the premier edition of GASSHO. Submissions are now being solicited. ---- *GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS* Unsolicited submissions of original works within any of the above categories are welcome. Authors should send articles directly to the Editor. Submissions may be sent through: US Post (no UPS, please), on DOS-formatted 5.24" or 3.5" disks, to: GASSHO, P.O. Box 4951, Berkeley CA 94704-4951. Internet Email to: dharma@netcom.com OR GASSHO@f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG Netmail or fileattach to: GASSHO, 1:125/33@fidonet OR GASSHO, 96:96/500@dharmanet File upload to: BODY DHARMA ONLINE, 1-510-836-4717 (data only) In the event that an article needs to be modified for publication the author will be responsible for making any alterations requested by the editors. When submitting articles please follow the guidelines below: 1. Except where noted below, articles should be submitted in the standard MLA (Modern Language Association) format. Additionally, certain modifications are necessary to make allowance for the electronic medium of the journal. 2. The maximum line width should not exceed 72 characters, so that people with a variety of terminals can read it without irritating line- wrapping. 3. Paragraphs should be block-form, ragged right, with a column-width of 72 characters. Block quotes are indented 10 characters from each margin, and are also ragged right. Justified paragraphs (paragraphs with straight margins on both right and left) are pretty, but hard to read, especially with a fixed-character-width font. 4. Use the double quote character (") for quotations, and the single quote (') for sub-quotations. All sources must be attributed. 3. Remember that no matter what word-processing program you use, the article must be saved in the 'ASCII' or 'Text' or 'DOS Text' format prior to uploading and sending it as an email message. Please do not include high-ascii characters, namely those with ASCII codes outside the range 32 to 126 inclusive, as these may not be displayed the same for other people. 4. Since attributes such as underlining and italics are not available in ASCII format please use the following conventions: *bold* %italics% ^superscript^ ~subscript~ _underline_ 4. Since page length loses its meaning in the electronic medium, authors are asked to number sections, and paragraphs within sections. Thus 2.13 would refer to section 2, paragraph 13 within an article. This is intended primarily for editing purposes and communicating with authors; the final release edition will not retain this "outline" format. 5. The footnoting/endnoting facility in word-processing programs is not automatically convertible into ASCII/Text/DOS Text. So it becomes necessary to do some "manual" conversion. The footnotes in the text of the article should be set in angle brackets, e.g. <1>, and the actual citations should be placed as endnotes at the end of the article. 6. All sections of the text should be divided by blank lines, namely section headings, paragraphs, entries in the bibliography and individual footnotes. 7. Submissions should be preceded by a header containing the title of the paper, the name(s) of the author(s), any affiliations, mail and e- mail addresses, and telephone numbers. The header should be formatted like the following example. TITLE: Title of the Paper AUTHOR: YourFirstName YourLastName AFFILIATION: YourCollegeorUniversity, YourDepartment OR YourOrganization, YourTitle MAIL ADDRESS: StreetAddress, City, State, Zip, Country E-MAIL ADDRESS: YourEMailAddress PHONE: Office/(nnn) nnn-nnnn; Home/(nnn) nnn-nnn 8. After this header, please include an abstract of no more than 150 words. This is intended primarily to help the editorial staff to sort and categorize incoming submissions. 9. The abstract should be followed by the text of the paper according to the text format described. This should then be followed by endnotes and bibliography, if applicable. 10. In referring to persons, living or dead, all persons should be initially referred to by their first and last names, and thereafter by their title, if it is known (Dr., Ms., Mr., Ven., etc.), and their last name. 11. The editorial policy of GASSHO is rooted in the Five Grave Precepts (Pancha-shila). Please consider whether a manuscript is in keeping with these guidelines before submitting. 12. Authors of accepted articles assign to GASSHO the right to publish the text both electronically and as printed matter and to make it available permanently in an electronic archive. However authors retain copyright of their work and may republish it in any form they wish so long as GASSHO is clearly acknowledged as the original source of publication. 13. Submissions to GASSHO will not be returned unless accompanied by a self-addressed stamped envelope or mailer. GASSHO cannot be held responsible for loss of or damage to unsolicited material. *REVIEWS* Publishers wishing to have books, audio tapes, videotapes, softwares or other publications in any media reviewed should send copies for consideration to: Review Editor, GASSHO P.O. Box 4951 Berkeley, CA 94704-4951 ---- BUDDHIST - via FidoNet node 1:125/1 UUCP: ...!uunet!kumr!shelter!33!BUDDHIST INTERNET: BUDDHIST@f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 05:41:49 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Bailey, Blavatsky, Swabhava et al Arvind, Thanks for your message. My not answering your "unfair" questions was not intentional. I'm often under a great deal of pressure for time, and go to theos-l as sort of a recreational break from my responsibilities. Sometimes I skim messages a little too quickly and miss things, or become too involved in responding to one question, thus forgetting about the others. So now I will try to answer your questions as best as I can. > (a) Which books have influenced you the most? That is a very difficult question to answer because I have been moved and influenced by many books on many different levels. I READ SWISS FAMILY ROBINSON in elementary school and somehow grew a lot in self understanding from it at the time. I was also deeply influenced by AESOP'S FABLES. The first theosophical book I ever read from cover to cover was Jinarajadasa's FIRST PRINCIPLES OF THEOSOPHY, and it inspired me into further theosophical reading. I think the three most important theosophical books I ever read was THE SECRET DOCTRINE and THE MAHATMA LETTERS TO A.P. Sinnett, and the THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, but can't rate them. I was also inspired by the first volume of Purucker's E.S. INSTRUCTIONS. But I suspect this may not answer your question, because I'm more deeply influenced by people than books. The most important people in my life have been those possessing what I perceive as deep wisdom and spirituality. > (b) What is your current spiritual 'practice' (to put it in > different words, how do you incorporate the 'spiritual' into > your daily living)? My spiritual approach and practice is primarly Jnana and karma yoga. That is I incorporate the spiritual through study and service (though I'm weaker than I ought to be on the latter). I also consider my marriage to be a spiritual practice, and perhaps the most important one. Further, I believe that the complete practice of any spiritual path ultimately includes all of the others. > (c) What is your current 'station' (or 'occupation') in life, > and what is your next step (or where are you going at the > moment)? My current "station or occupation" are several: 1. I'm a husband, father, and home owner. 2. I'm a student in the Masters program at Cal. State Stanislaus. My major is English Literature. 3. I operate a mail order book dealership on a part time bases, specializing in Metaphysics, Mythology and Folklore. 4. I'm associate editor of an acadenic journal called THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY, published out of Cal. State Fullerton. 5. I'm a researcher into Occult movements and an archivest. As far as where I'm going at the moment: I'm trying to get through the Masters program in order to continue on for a Ph.D. I'm also trying to get rid of all of the cursed Bermuda grass in the backyard in order to plant a garden. > Also, as I was reading one of Eldon's recent articles where he > has mentioned > that the efforts of the Masters are many times not 'successful', > the thought > occurred to me that the three books by AAB containing DK's > instructions > to his disciples ('Discilpleship in the New Age' Volumes I and > II, and > 'Glamour, A World Problem) are a result of an experiment which > He (DK) termed > a failure! This comment ties into a previous comment that (I > think) you had > made indicating that HPB's Masters were fallible, whereas the > Masters in other systems of esoteric studies are made to look > like entirely 'failure-proof'. Yes, the Mahatma Letters have several allusions to that effect. In what manner were the above three books failures? > Another comment that I want to make is with reference to the > quote from ML ('Mahatama Letters')attributed to KH containing > DK's name ...the >reason I cited that in my previous > communication was that it is the very first time I saw > a reference to DK's name by KH. DK has stated in the > introductory pages of > all of the books that He has written (I think it is called > "Extract from a > Statement by the Tibetan') that He helps out the Masters M and > KH whenever > needed, and this quote from KH indicates that He (KH) was indeed > willing and > able to use DK as the need arose. D.K. shows up every now and again in the Mahatma Letters working with M and KH. He was a chela, and that is what chela's do. > I have asked some of my colleagues about this problem. What I > have myself > experienced is that many times I am not able to send a message > out to certain > destinations 'nodes' which are restricted by our MIS department. > I'll try > to follow up some more on this but it appears to me that the > problem could > be at your end since a number of others in different cities > (everyone except > you) have been able to send me messages at > exuaxk@exu.ericsson.se. You > know that the 'se' in this address stands for Sweden, and > perhaps the system administrator of your node has restricted > access to >messages going to Sweden. I doubt that I have any restrictions. This Internet account is part of my "fringe benefits package" from the University for being in the Masters program here (California), which I use for research. I was told that I have access to the electronic catalogue of Oxford University in England (haven't had a need to try it yet). As for my Peacenet account, this is also supposed to be international. But I will ask. > I hope to write to David sometime in the future. If you have a > phone number > for him, that will be great (much quicker to call than write)! > What is the > latest on discovering the book or document called 'Stanzas of > Dzyan'? It'd > be great to get access to the complete work some day! I will send Dave's phone number to you. Dave has identified the general group of tantric texts that the Kiu Tie texts are identified with. But he is a long way from finding the Stanza of Dzyan. Dave feels that they are not yet public, therefore not available unless you are a Tibetan initiate. But you can talk to Dave directly about that. > For your information, Lucis trust has two compilations ready > to go into the publishers, one on the 7 Rays ("Saptarishi') > and the other on the 7th Ray in particular. I donot think > that you can > order them just now but I can let you know when I come to know > about their availability. BTW can I ask you for a copy of your > most recent catalog? My address is 3024 Landershire Ln, Plano > TX 75023-800824. I guarantee to buy at least some of the books > from you sometime soon! > > Regarding Helena Roerich's books...they are regarded very highly > by most Bailey students and also by Lucis Trust. Immediately > when I found out about the Bailey books some five years ago, I > ordered (in great enthusiasm) ALL of the books written by Bailey > and Helena Roerich--I did not order all of Blavatsky's books > because Lucis does not sell them. These Roerich books > (published by the Agni Yoga Society) are supposed to have been > dictated by the Master Morya. Frankly I have not gotten around > to reading even a single one of these Roerich books so far (but > it is one of my aims to be able to read them at least once > during this lifetime!) Have you read any of these, and do you > have any comments/guidelines on a 'reading program for potential > theosophists'? My latest catalogue is being printed, and is on Health and Healing. I will sent it to you as soon as it is ready. Hopefully before xmas. I have some of Helena Roerich's books in my library. They are of a very devotional genre, but they didn't capitivate me like THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE and the first volume of Purucker's E.S. INSTRUCTIONS. For whatever that is worth, I question whether Master Morya of the Mahatma Letters had anything to do with them, because the writing style, word choice, context, and slant are entirely different. Maybe they were dictated by someone else with the same name. Any way, when you get around to reading them, I would be interested in your comments. I also have Nicholas Roerich's ALTA HIMALAYA. I found that more interesting. I don't have much call for Bailey's books anymore. We use to sell a lot about 15 years ago. I still have a good stock of her writings. As for the new compilations, rather than stock them, I will probably just order copies as I get requests. > I asked around at Lucis Trust yesterday if they had any page > reference numbers to quotes from SD (or any of the other HPB > books). They did not, at least they could not help me on the > spot. I started reading the SD before we started these > discussions and as I have admitted before, indeed I donot > remember where the quote about the psychological key to SD is > in HPB's SD. I will keep looking but I do wish to thank Brenda > Eldon for providing the page reference to at least one of the > quotes that I was looking for. I donot know whether AAB was > better fitted than HPB (no doubt in my mind that they were > both great Initiates), it appears that the Hierarchy uses > anyone who has the right 'equipment' -- even a beginner on the > probationary path can be used if the purpose can be served. Perhaps you can go back to Bailey's book where you first saw the reference. Perhaps she will have the reference in a footnote. Then I could take it from there. What is Lucis Trust's E-Mail address? Nancy, Good to have you back. I think were have alread started comparing HPB and AAB starting with the psychological key, and the successorship issues. Me thinks that the discussion will go a bit slow because it takes time to find references. Arvind is trying to involve others who are faster at finding them. If he does then things might speed up. We haven't discovered much yet. We had to lay a lot of ground work to make sure that we understood each other. I think that was very important, otherwise we would have been doing a lot of writing and no communicating. Regarding swabhava and swabhavat, I studied Latin, which is also a declined language, so I know exactly what you mean. Purucker treats swabhava and swabhavat as two entirely different words, not as two declinations of the same word. Check out Purucker's OCCULT GLOSSARY and you'll see what I mean. On the other hand, he gives the same verb-root to both of them. I would be interested if you bounced your question concerning these as being two declinations of the same noun off of Grace. I bet she will have a very interesting response. Karman appears to be a different story. According to Purucker, Karman is the noun form of Karma. Purucker, added the "n" to Karma in all of his books. For a while the Point Loma people encouraged the adoption of the word Karman as the more correct spelling of karma, but finally dropped it. H.P.B.'s Karma is supposed to be the same as G.de P.'s Karman. Grace can fill you in on that, she was around then. What reincarnates? Purucker says the Reincarnating Ego. That would be the interface of Atma-Buddhi with manas, but not kama-manas. This also conforms with H.P.B.'s E.S. INSTRUCTIONS. Clear as mud? Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 11:51:46 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: a sample meditation Meditation is a general term, one with many meanings. It has been used to describe everything from a passive sitting for psychic development to intense concentration. We could try to define it, but the definition would have to be arbitrary, since there are so many things that it could refer to. Rather than trying to pin it down to describe a single practice, it might be better to look at a few different forms of meditation and see if there's anything that might be useful for the serious Theosophist. Each of the various practices provide their own type of training. There are specific goals for each technique. We have training in unmoveable concentration, in contemplation, and in penetrating wisdom. What would we recommend? It depends upon the person, but we can distinguish between good and bad practices. On the bad side are the practices that open up the psychic nature, that have us practice a passivity of consciousness, a negative receptivity. We can sit and be impressionable and give ourselves over to the impressions. But this is not good. The self-conscious nature must be strengthened, not weakened. The degree of control over our awareness must be enhanced, not surrendered. We need to awaken the brilliant, shining, penetrating mind, the diamond mind, where our nature is illuminated from within. We do not descend into the fog and see what comes to us. Meditation might be called a cultivation of mind, where some sense of direction is applied. Certain thoughts are weeded out. Others are nurtured. Like turning a field of weeds into a flower garden, we kill out what should not be there, and plant and water what we want to see. The initial--and never-ending--study of the core concepts of Theosophy represent the sowing of the ground, the planting of the crop, the planting of the flower bulbs that will make our future garden. Then we tend to it, daily, and see that the weeds are uprooted and it gets watered. We control our thoughts, we direct them, by dwelling on the beautiful, the noble, the grand truths. When an ugly, hateful, destructive thought enters our mind, we cannot recall it. Once a thought has been born into the world, it has a life of its own, and cannot be recalled. We are forever responsible for having given it birth. But we can counteract the harm that it may do, by creating thoughts of an opposite nature, thoughts that will undo its harm. Having a thought of hate, for instance, we can picture the opposite, and send out a thought of love. And we can, even when not responsible for setting loose evil thoughts in the world, practice thinking kindly, nobly, charitably of others. We can practice keeping high thoughts of others and intentionally, in our minds, wish them well. Having a meditation at a fixed period every day can help, by the force of habit, to assist one in the process. The natural rhythm of the daily cycle can calm one, bring him into the proper frame of mind, and make the meditation a natural thing. This is good for beginners, because it guarantees that at least for a few minutes everyday that the spiritual is considered, that the spiritual is not completely forgotten in the mad rush of the daily events. For people opening up to more, for those approaching the Path, they can carry their meditation with them throughout the day. They too may set aside some time, but it is less important that it be the same every day. They treasure the higher life, and go back to it whenever a few free moments offer themselves. They are, in a sense, in love with the spiritual, and seek to behold it when then can. And when busy with the responsibilities of the daily life, when not able to directly think about their beloved, they still carry it with them, in the background, as a pervasive feeling and thought that colors things and imparts a richer quality to the experience of life. We can practice this, we can dwell in thought on things that are greater than ourselves, and *live life in a wider perspective*. By not considering things from the standpoint of the personality, by not acting based upon personal advantage, by working for the universal good, we can live, in a sense, on a higher plane, as we go through the experience of life, even though we may, outwardly, be doing the very same activites as before. For the most advanced, for advanced chelas, having a specific time of day for meditation again becomes important. This has to do with their occult training, something that we would not be ready for without the proper instruction and without reaching the proper state of readiness. We really don't need to concern ourselves with this aspect of meditation. Let us consider one meditative practice. This is somethat that most of us could follow with little trouble. We may take about 30 to 45 minutes a day, and do it in the morning, upon awakening, or just before bed at night. We would find a place where there was no external distractions, where the people about us would not disrupt our practice, and pull us away to do something else. We can still be surrounded by the the sounds of others, we do not need solitude. And people can be going about their activites about us, as long as they let us be, and do not interrupt what we are doing. We accept what is going on about us as part of the noise of our lives, both externally in the outer world as well as internally, in the mind, and simply allow it to be. We allow life to go on, and learn to function in that part of us that remains undisturbed, that operates at a different, a higher level, than the activites of the personal world, a part that observes but is unaffected. Divide the meditative period into three parts of about equal length. The first part is to work on releasing the mental noise, on letting go of the activity of Kama-Manas, of stepping away from the turbulent swirl of the brain-mind activities of our everyday life. Our minds are filled with the details of the day-to-day life. We think of groceries to buy, of letters to write, of people to call. We are concerned about things that we must do next week. We are filled with thoughts of our the immediate activities of our personal lives. All this is Kama-Manas, and must be let go of, but not in an irresponsible way. We let go of these thoughts, but still insure that their needs are met. For what we do is to sit still, at a desk, with pad of paper and pen, and face these thoughts head on. As thoughts arise regarding things that we must do, we write notes. If the thought is important, we write something, if it is not, we give it up, and truly decide that it will not be done, and write nothing. We are passing judgement on this rush of thoughts, saving those to paper that we must do, and letting go of them. Having writting a reminder word, phrase, or few sentances, we know that we won't forget to do that important thing! It will not be forgotten, so we can let go of the thought, forget it, and it frees us a bit further, to pursue our meditation. We are doing, in a small sense, what happens in the second death, the breaking free of Kama-Manas in the after-death process, and are preparing to more forward. These thoughts will keep rushing at us, and a few minutes is not sufficient to take care of them all. We are only skimming off the surface. We can handle a few of them, but try to move on to the next of the three stages of this meditation after a few minutes, because the time is so short! Where we to spend an entire week at a zen retreat, a Dai Sesshin, meditating from 3 a.m. to 9 p.m., with individual guidance by a Zen Master, we'd still, perhaps, find layer after layer of these thoughts arising, perhaps through the entire week. These outer thoughts never go away, as long as we have personalities, since they represent the mental functioning of the personality. In our training, in our meditation, we are trying to rise above them, to function in something higher, to awaken self-consciousness in a higher part of ourselves, as the first step in the process of making that higher center our seat of consciousness. The personality still functions, it still has its thoughts, but we are working on someday being Dhyani Chohans, on being Manasaputras, on functioning at Buddhi-Manas rather than Kama-Manas, and so we seek in our meditation to first quiet the mind, then to try to function deeper within. The second step in this meditation would be to sit still, putting down pen and paper, and contemplate theosophical thoughts, like Manas, or high virtues, like Truth, and try to see it all about one, everywhere in life. Find the though prevading everything, look at it from every angle, and try truly to understand it. Pick a single thought, and stick to it. Gaze upon it and behold its true nature, and consider how it manifests itself in the world. Then look upon yourself as having become, as being the idea that you've been contemplating. Picture yourself as *it*, expressing itself in the world. The third step in the meditation would be to stop trying to look at the idea, the virtue, the ideal, and just sit quietly. Accept life, don't try to put any qualification upon it. Picture the void and dwell in it. But when picturing the void, the inner, dark, deep, secret side to life, do not contemplate it as the lack of something, as the privation of things that exist. It is without qualification, even that of negation, and cannot be pictured except in the sense of simply *being*. It is here, but nowhere, and we just accept it, realize that we are bathed in, and deeply rooted in it. We sit in reverence, in full enjoyment, in perfect peace, and contemplate our root nature. These three stages of this example meditation reflect the three stages of the after-death stages, the three stages of letting go from life. First is the freeing from the personality, second is the release from the ideal world, from the formless, higher nature, and finally the dwelling in the inner silence. The final aspect of the meditation would corresponding to the return to live, to seeking a new rebirth in the world. We come back to the duty to see that our list of items are actually done, as we have written that they will, in this very day, or that they are put on our calander and really scheduled to be done. More importantly, we have a responsiblity to carry the sense of peace and perfection that we have felt, and the new understanding of the noble truth or virtue that we have experienced. We have a responsibility to carry it into our coming day, if we've just meditated in the morning, or to go to sleep, then awaken to the next day with being carried out the next day, if our meditation was late at night, before going to bed. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 16:34:55 -0500 From: eldon@raider.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM Subject: good and bad meditation When we go to a bookstore or library to read about meditation, we find that it is a rich, diverse field of study. Much thought has been given to the subject, especially by eastern religions like Buddhism. There is a varied assortment of techniques that we could practice. There are also mysteries of the mind, of the operation of Manas, that we may have not been aware of. Certain meditative approaches can help bring them out, and we need to be careful of what we may undertake. One mystery concerns the other ways that thought may happen. Consider our typical form of thought. It corresponds to the sense of hearing. What we know in the mind, what has surfaced at the moment to the surface of the mind is *heard* in a mental narration. There may also be other aspects of knowing, that correspond to the sense of sight, where an entire field of vision is taken in at a single glance. For now, we'd probably best leave these other aspects of the mind as mysteries, and consider these various meditative practices that we find offered us, in order to decide which, if any, it would be good to adopt. We should concentrate on the question of telling the good techniques from the bad. Of the meditative practices that we may find offered us, it would be possible to live a constructive, spiritual life by following one of them, one of the good ones. But we need certain keys provided by Theosophy to distinguish the helpful from the hurtful. In examining an approach to meditation, we need to ask ourselves a number of questions. We need to examine what is taught, and the affects on the practitioners. Does the technique teach an escape or release from the world, or does it help us to be infilled with the spirit? Are we trained in the path of the solitary one, the Pratyeka Buddha, the path of personal liberation, or the path of the Bodhisattva, the path of Compassion? This difference would show up in the contents of what we are taught to meditate on, as well as the approach. Meditating with the eyes half-opened, like in Zen, helps, for instance, with staying here in the world, with become infilled with the spirit, rather than an escape. Are we taught to seek after powers, to gain personal powers, or are we trained in the higher faculties? Do we seek clairvoyance, or seek wisdom? Do we seek changes to the personality or seek an experience of a higher consciousness? Are we training to control nature and others, or training in self control? Do we seek to control other people, to shape their lives, or do we seek to redirect and refocus our own life? Do we strive to draw money and recognition to ourselves, to make others do or be what we'd want them to, or do we dwell deeply in unselfishness, in generosity, in respect of the rights of others to direct their own lives? Do we experience impatience, expectation, and alternate between dissatisification and pleasure, or do we sink deeply into peace, bliss, insight, and harmony with life? Do things in our outer life start going the way we'd have them, with the consequent regret that comes from not really knowing what we've gotten ourselves into. Or, on the other hand, do things come to us out of a sense of mystery, where they appear in an almost coincidental, but magical sort of way? Is our experience one of unreality, at times, with moments of doubt, disbelief, of gnawing uncertainity? Or are their flashes of sweeping inspiration, of certainity, of grandeur, of *knowing* life to be rooted in a higher reality? Are there opportunities arising in our lives, opportunities for personality advancement, sometimes at the expense of others? Or do we find futher opportunities for selfless work, for acts of self-forgetfulness, of doing good without self-awareness that we are doing so, of sacrifice without sense of personal loss? And finally, do the theosophical Teachings grow more meaningless, arbitrary, becoming a confusing jumble of words that are difficult to make sense of. Or do they become richer, more magical, a vaster source of learning and insight? There are various things that we can look for in considering a meditative technique. We must choose one that is good for us, one carefully picked to aid our progress and assist us in becoming agents of good in the world, rather than one that would set us back, and burden us with the karma of causing injury to ourselves and others. Even, though, if we do not pick out a meditative technique, even if we do not choose to meditate, we are really already doing so. For the contemplation of the Teachings, their study, is a higher activity, a high form of mediation in itself. With no goal in mind, no sense of personality, no picturing of concrete activites, we just dwell in the sacred philosophy, we dwell in the brilliant, the luminious, the divine side of life. We visit a deep part of our natures, as we dive into the study of Theosophy, and undertake a most grand meditation! It is a high form of meditation to dwell in the Mystery Teachings and live for a moment in that part of our nature that corresponds to them. That part of us perceives life without directly acting in the personal world, and is truly the realm of the gods! Our study is not just a high form of thinking, not just the practice of a high form of knowing about things, but is truly a spiritual practice. We have something special, and we should treat our treasure with the highest respect. When we open some of our great books, when we visit the lofty realms of life in our thought, we should go with reverence, with deep regard, with a sense of the sacred. For we are visiting the realm of the gods, as a guest, and even a trace of the profane, of the selfish or ignoble, would blind us to the beauty that we behold! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:03:19 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Bailey, Blavatsky, Swabhava et al Hi jerry HE from Nancy Thanks. I'll see what I can dig up at swabhava/t around here. Bruce still comes to teach Sanskrit weekly and maybe I can get his take on it. My tongue was firmly in my cheek when I asked, whatreally reincarnates? Seems to me that most people are not very satisfied to think about reincarnation in the terms that we mean it. I'm not sure I'm very satisfied with it either. Unfortunately, it makes too much sense to ignore. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 09:20:00 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the 7 keys in the SD I did a global search, in Wordperfect, of my computerized version of THE SECRET DOCTRINE. The text is not fully cleaned up, but most of it is readable, so I was able to search most of what was in it. I was looking for the text about every place where the word "key" appeared. I quickly noted down what the key was described as, and in a few minutes had gone through the book. There's a chance that a more careful reading, which I may do in the future, will alter what I've come up with, but following are my results. Of the following keys, "mystical" was mentioned as the first, and "geometrical" as the fifth. I did not notice mention of the order of the others, except that the higher four of the seven unlock the occult powers of nature. There were more than seven keys mentioned, and some terms seemed to refer to the same key, so I've combined the terms. The combination is my own responsibility, and I might combine them differently at a later time when reading the passages I found more carefully. 1. mystical 2. law of analogy, symbolism 3. human physiology, anthroposophy 4. astronomical, metrological 5. geometric, numerical 6. astrological, theogonic 7. Atma-Vidya In my quick search, I did not come across the reference to a psychological key, although my examination was cursory, and I won't rule out that a more through examination of the passages might change the above list. Does anyone remember reading something of HPB's, apart from THE SECRET DOCTRINE, where she talks about the seven keys? Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 15:39:22 -0500 From: eldon@raider.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM Subject: purity and the unstained mind In approaching self-development, including the practice of meditation, there is a misconception, a maya that leads us astray. There is an incorrect understanding of the nature of power, of the nature of perfection or completion that leads us to take the wrong approach. Reaching perfection is never a matter of power. We mislead ourselves when we say: "If only I tried *harder*, I'd achieve my goal!" It is not a matter of strength, of the quantity of energy applied. We do not simply try harder and harder at our meditation, until one day we've tried hard enough and we achieve our results. No matter how loudly we knock on the door to the Mysteries, there will be no answer. Until we give the correct knock, we stand before a barrier that we cannot penetrate, regardless of the force applied. We are are *trying*, rather than *doing*, if there is a sense of pushing, of strain, then we are not taking the correct approach. To open a door we turn the handle, we do not kick it in. We turn the right key in the lock, and don't force one that does not fit until it may break. We give the right password (really the right *word* as a content of meditation), and we are granted admission. Another maya, another misperception of the nature of the spiritual, is regarding purity. We may think that our barrier to progress is our lack of personal purity in our lives and actions. We may believe that if only we were pure enough that we would one day reach the point of enlightenment and perfection. This idea of purity is another avoidance of the true nature of the spiritual. It is really not a *more* of this or that, of anything personal, including *more* in the sense of percentages. We dwell in the spiritual, bathe in it, clothe our daily life in it, enwrap, envelope, and surround the activities of our lives in it. And if we make a mistake, fall down, and do something personal, petty, selfish, ignoble, we forget it, let it go, move on, and continue to dwell in the highest. It is an evil practice to give in to something of the lower nature, and then afterwards to turn our back on the spiritual for a time. The failure, the transgression cannot be helped at times, but the turning of our backs upon our source is unforgivable. We may want to avoid a feeling of shame or feeling that we are undeserving of the spiritual, and want to avoid any feeling of regret for a time. But we should not feel regret! We should let go of our mistake, and move on. We do not have to hide from the spiritual for a time, like a naughty child avoiding immediate punishment from his parents! We should *come home* immediately, and forgive ourselves so that we can move on. When we slip and fall, when we do a wrong, we forgive ourselves and sincerely embrace the higher again. Yet another misunderstanding regards the necessity to remain 100 percent pure. The sense of *enough* applies to a percentage, and we may tell ourselves that we must never, ever make a mistake. This attitude leads us to consider abandoning the effort when a single mistake is made, because the live we are trying to live is too hard, too exacting. We are forced to make the choice between living a hard, inflexible life, or not bother trying at all to be a better person. Because we've become tainted, because we've lost our 100 percent purity in some way, we may feel that we've failed and are useless as people and our lives have been ruined. This is like the mistaken idea of a virgin, the idea that says that once we've had the experience we are forever changed. But we can become *virgin* again, we can attain the same state of innocence of consciousness that is unstained by our mistakes. Any feeling of being different, changed, defiled, is one that we allow ourselves to dwell in. We use that feeling as a maya, a self-deception, an excuse, to avoid continuing to try to live the higher life. There is no real excuse to not return to the state of spiritual purity and dwell in it, no matter what the mistake or transgression. We can always get up again, when knocked down by life, and return home, to our source. We should alawys dwell in the highest, and when we fall away, for a moment, we should always feel welcome back and want to return. We should feel glad to come back home, as soon as we recognize that we've lost ourselves! Our spiritual nature is uncorrupted by our personal failures, and is the source of our healing of any injory or sickness of soul that we may externally experience. This spiritual nature, the impersonal seat of consciousness within, is our heart, the mystery of our being--not heart in the sense of a feeling nature, but rather heart as being our essential self. This is the home that we long to return to. It is our divine parent and our true nature. And we can live in it and one day make it our seat of consciousness, even as we continue in the outer world to function as human personalities. The holy, the sacred, the heart of life is not achieved by lower means, of whatever intensity. It is achieved by *something different*, not by *something stronger*. We could be deep in devotion, with very intense feelings, and want harder and harder our objective, perhaps union with a spiritual beloved. But at the end, we are depleted and may feel cleansed but have run down and depleted our energy. We have undergone an emotional workout, one of a spiritual nature, and our personal and psychological health may have been improved, but we are not closer to the true spiritual because of it. We are no more closer to the spiritual than if we had been partcicing hatha yoga. We have exercised our personal nature in a particular way, but not directly engaged the higher nature. The same is true of intense concentration, where there is a sense of strain, where we have, perhaps, grit our teeth and sit with clenched fists and a fierce resolve. We really want our objective! But we cannot push through to the higher, because the higher is not an extrapolation or magnification of the personal. We may strengthen our personal faculties, but have not penetrated deeper. Again, we may bury ourselves 100 percent of the time in some activity. It may even be for the good of the world, a selfless thing. But if it is an escape from the numerous responsiblities of our life, we have gone astray. For the spiritual *enhances* our lives, it enriches us, it does lead us to neglect our ties with others and our personal responsibilities in the world. We must look to the right part of ourselves in our meditation, and in our lives. It is not a workout, not an exhausting strain, that we undergo, but a quite mind and heart, like a cool, placid mountain lake, where we are gentle, reverend, respectively in the presence of something higher. We strive for the middle way, for balance, poise, a lightness to life that is not heavy, strained, somber, gloomy. We develope the qualities of consciousness that lead us to be light, cheerful, bright, full of love and hope. We apply not a titanic power, to achieve our goals, sweeping away all obstacles, but rather apply an unrelenting determination, a persistence that never gives up. We train ourselves, in our meditation and in our daily lives, to dwell in the beauty, the love, the wisdom within! It is something that we dearly want, yet it is so easy to attain. Let us *be it*, not by force of will, by intensity of aspiration, by any attempt at more or better at anything, but to *be it* by already being it. Let us recognize it in ourselves, it is there, it is part of our consciousness, but it is up to us to being self-consciousness to it, to become aware of it and its functionings. Let us take the treasure that we already have in our hand, and find true peace! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 17:59:34 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Differences - AAB/HPB Nancy , Jerry H-E and others: I am going to make a couple of quick remarks before I leave my office for the day on the question below regarding any differences between the teachings of AAB and HPB. I certainly hope to follow-up more on Jerry's comments later this week. I have read sevral of AAB's books and in addition I have been in the AS (Arcane School, which AAB founded) for some 4 years. All I have read within the AS and within the books of AAB regarding HPB has been nothing but a confirmation of the truth in HPB's teachings; if AAB or DK did find something in HPB's books which was not to their liking or which was not a fact, I have NOT seen any references to it. The problem from the other side (i.e. regarding HPB's position on AAB teachings) is hard to gauge since HPB passed on some 30 years before AAB started writing her books. I have so far only read one of HPB's books (and that too I am only about 80% finished--some 1300 pages out of 1500 of SD). There is only ONE paragraph that I have come across in SD that may be considered somewhat different from AAB's writing, and I think even this paragraph is perhaps explainable in the light of the fact that the Masters (or the Hierarchy) seem to 'experiment' or institue changes in response to demands by Humanity. The para I am referring to appears in Vol I towards the very end of Section II (before the Addendum on comparison of SD with Science)-- I'll have to quote the page number etc. later. It says that the Maitreya Buddha, the great Kalki Avatar will appear during the 7th Root Race, several hundred thousand years from now. But I have read in the 'Reappearance of the Christ' (ROC) by AAB that in response to Humanity's invocation during the great World War during this century, the Christ has decided to reappear in physical form sometime by the year 2025. Perhaps there is a way to reconcile these two statements made by these two great initiates (HPB and AAB), and I hope to write more on this later. MAY THE POWER OF THE ONE LIFE POUR THROUGH THE GROUP OF ALL TRUE SERVERS! MAY THE LOVE OF THE ONE SOUL CHARACTERIZE THE LIVES OF ALL WHO SEEK TO AID THE GREAT ONES! MAY I FULFILL MY PART IN THE ONE WORK THROUGH SELF_FORGETFULNESS, HARMLESSNESS AND RIGHT SPEECH! In Love and Light, Arvind > I eagerly await your discussion comparing HPB and AAB. Please > hurry up already. I correspond with some folks who see no diff- > erence and since I've read very little AAB, I'm curious to > know what you folks have discovered. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 20:31:18 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Globes - a proposition Some Thoughts on the Globes of the Gupta Vidya Model of our Universe. HPB gave us a fairly clear representation of her Gupta Vidya Model on page 200 of Vol I of The Secret Doctrine. By comparing it to the well-known Qabalistic Tree of Life, she allowed those who already knew the Qabala to fully realize the differences between the two universe models. Both models, for example, have 7 globes located on the 4 lower cosmic planes. HPB used the names for the planes as given in the Qabala: the Physical, the Substantial/Formative, the Intellectual/Creative, and lastly the Archetypal. I personally prefer physical, astral, mental, and causal, but each student is free to call them whatever they like. In Qabalistic lore, the astral light is represented by the Sephira Yesod. HPB equates Yesod with Globe C. She also equates Netzah with Globe E. Thus she places Globes C and E together on the Formative/Astral plane. Globes B and F are both on the Creative/Mental plane. Finally we have Globes A and G which are both on the Archetypal/Causal plane. Beneath the figure, she states "these are the four lower planes of Cosmic Consciousness, the three higher planes being inaccessible to human intellect as developed at present." Because the three higher planes are "inaccessible to human intellect" we can safely say that the lower 7 globes are bounded above by a Ring-Pass-Not for us in our present stage of evolutionary development. I would go so far as to say that above these 7 globes is the Abyss of Qabalistic tradition. The Great Outer Abyss separates the higher cosmic planes from the lower. In the same way, we can say that each plane itself is divided into 7 subplanes, 4 lower and 3 higher which are also separated by a Ring-Pass-Not. When we look at our physical plane, it seems that there are only three subplanes - solids, liquids, and gases. But recently science has discovered what is called plasma, and this seems like it could be the missing fourth subplane or state of matter on this physical cosmic plane. Beyond the plasma of our physical plane is a Ring-Pass-Not. In fact, we could even make the case that the higher 3 subplanes constitute another plane altogether. Some have called the higher 3 subplanes of the physical plane the etheric plane. Leadbeater distinguishes the upper 3 from the lower 4 subplanes of the mental plane. My own feeling is that we could do this with each plane, because I believe that the Globes are, in fact, located on the lower 4 subplanes of each cosmic plane, leaving the higher 3 subplanes almost like a separate "mini-plane" in each case. But there are several very important differences between the HPB's model and the Qabala model. The first, and probably the most important, is the flow of energy/force through the model. The Qabalistic model is relatively static, with all 22 pathways going in both directions. The Gupta Vidya Model is dynamic, with travel being possible only in counterclockwise cycles, and not in the reverse direction. HPB has all energy moving downward along the left side, and all energy moving upward along the right side. Because theosophy makes the initial assumption of cycles (what I have elsewhere called the Law of Cycles - described in the Proem to the SD) I feel that the Gupta Vidya Model is far superior to the somewhat more static and clumsy Tree of Life. Now, given all of the above, let me make a rather important proposition. I would submit that each and every one of us has had some experience on all 7 globes - within this very lifetime. We will all agree, of course, that we experience Globe D during the waking state. I propose that we all experience Globes C and E and their interconnecting path during dreams (dreams with emotional content). I propose that we all experience Globes B and F during our sleep states (dreams without emotional content). I would furthermore propose that we all experience Globes A and G during our dreamless sleep or coma-like state in between dreams. Dreams can, in fact, be defined as out-of-body experiences on Globes C, E, B, or F. I submit that the Globes of the Gupta Vidya Model are not far away exotic places that we will reach only after a million years of evolution, but states and stages of consciousness that we experience (to some extent) as human beings - Globe D being the locality in spacetime of physically embodied consciousness, Globes C and E being localities of astrally embodied consciousness, and so on. This proposition has a lot of important ramifications for us, and we can discuss them at a later time. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 10:29:16 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: dwelling in our higher natures In our western world, the term *meditation* is used to describe a diverse number of practices. It might be good to use it to describe a higher form of practice, where we approach the spiritual within, and distinguish that from the other practices, that at best distract us from our inner natures, if not leading us astray. If a practice has us visualizing lights, visualizing forces *doing things*, forces changing things in the world, then we are in the psychical, in our imagery, and the magical or phenomenal in our practice. If we are trying to control the inner forces of nature in order to make changes happen in the outer world, then we are attempting to practice the occult arts, and are not practicing a spiritual meditation. A meditation that is more psychically oriented, would be based upon seeing things, upon directed imagery, perhaps having us imagine what is on some other plane. A meditation that is more phenomena oriented, would be based upon seeing things happen in the world, upon sending out energy to change people and events in the external world. A spiritual meditation is not psychical and passive, it does not involve receiving impressions, images of external things. And it is not magical, not involving the occult arts, it does not involve using the mind, the desire, the life energies going outward to fashion or shape the external world in some way. In a high form of meditation, we go deep into abstract thought or pure being. Images, visions, impressions do not come to us, or if they do, we are unaware of them. We are operating within at a level that is different from the lower nature, from the personality. It is there, functional, present, but we are centered deeper within, deeper than the personal powers or perception. In Zen, if we were to start seeing images in our meditative practice, we would be told to shut them off, that they are delusional, a dsitraction from the direct path to realization. This is an aspect of spiritual meditation, the directing of the attention *away from* the phenomenal and sensory side of life. Now this does not mean that we tune out the world, that we close our eyes and forget that we have a physical body and try to exist on some other plane. No. All the lower principles are embraced in our meditation, they are included. But the lower principles are not focused upon, they are not active, they are at a state of rest, and we are aware of them being present but do not put any energy into them. This shutting off of imagery, though, refers to a passive, receptive, impressionable state of mind. It is different, and an acceptable practice to take an object of meditation, such as a Tibetan deity, and visualize it as part of a meditation. The emphasis is on self-awareness, on staying in control of everything that happens, on directing the flow of consciousness, which is the opposite of a passive reception of astral imagery. The emphasis is upon self-control, on self-direction, on inner mastery of the experiences of consciousness. We are not under the direction of a group leader, for instance, where we are told to visualize this thing happening, another thing happening, and so on. We are not taken anywhere by someone else's volition. Our training is in initiative, in self-originating consciousness, in bringing out further awareness and power of understanding *from within*, which is the opposite of increased suggestibility, increased receptivity to the direction of others, increased yielding to what others would have us see and think. Meditation is not psychical development, and it is not hypnotic receptivity. It involves pure thought, direct insight, beingness. We are active rather than passive, creative rather than receptive, and insightful rather than developed in the senses. In meditation, we are mentally perceptive rather than psychically sensitive; we radiate from within rather than tuning in to things outside; we have the certainity of knowing things from personal experience, rather than just seeing and hearing vague, illusory images. We function in the faculty of the higher nature, rather than in astral consciousness. And we are strengthened and centered, harmonized, rather than weakened, disoriented, confused, filled with doubt and uncertainity. The experience is more like approaching the holy with reverence than like entering the birght colors and sounds of a carnival or circus. We are not entering the lusty, the corrupting, the profane, the mortal nature, but rather are rooted in the heart of the world, the heart of life, and are sold like a mountain. There is no sense of being vague, turblent, unstable, or weak. In one sense, we experience the richnes of emersion in the unmanifest, in the darkness of chaos. In another sense, we experience the perfection of *suchness*, of the certainity of oneness, the perfection of cosmos. The highest virtues can be experienced, and not as vague, illusive generalizations, as unreal abstractions, but rather as living realities, as an actual part of our being. The correct approach to meditation requires us to have a clear understanding of the differenct between the purely mental, and the spiritual nature, on the one hand, and the psychical, lower human nature on the other. Our practice is not for personal liberation, not for the cultivation of powers, not to cuase things to happen in the outer world. We are not seeking to attain powers nor anything for ourselves, as persons. We are rather cultivating the spiritual, and the lower nature will automatically, of its own accord, come into line and take care of itself. Externally, things will fall into place and almost happen magically, as though they were being taken care of for us. We do not put considerable time and energy into refashioning our personalities, because we try to keep our consciousness functioning at a level where we are unaware of the personality side to life. In our hike along the mountain trail, we behold the beautiful mountains before us and are inspired. We take in the grand panorama and dwell in high thoughts, and do not give most of our time and attention to wiping the mud off our boots. The personality is a collection of habits, of attributes, a self with certain likes and dislikes. Were we to try as a regular practice to *personally* disassociate ourselves from it, we would not be really doing so. The mental dialog is not escaped by thinking "these are my thoughts and I will direct them". The desire nature is not escaped by wanting different desires. We do not refashion the personality by turning it on itself. When we seek to change our personality by using it to change itself, by disassociation, by trying to change it by functioning in it, we fail. We cannot simply split the personality in two, and say that this, the bigger portion, is the bad personality that we want to make better, that that that, the smaller portion, is the real person, trying to direct the changes in the other. Don't split the personality in two. Don't at times say that you are the higher self, trying to oppose the mistakes of the lower self. Don't try to use the personality against itself. To do so does not really allow you to function in the higher self and to make things better. What is really happening is that a second, a alternate personality is created, the pretend higher self, the person that we might dwell in while being pious, while feeling apart from, above, better than we are in most of the activities of our lives. We have created a second personality that we switch to at times, when we tell ourselves how spiritual we are, and fill ourselves with denial of the other, our regular personality. This is wrong and will not help us. We are caught up, ensnared further in the lower side of life, in the personal and selfish, and have even more to untangle ourselves from. The proper approach is to dwell in the highest within, and leave the personality to change over time. We don't attack the personality head on, and even when we work on self-improvement, we don't dwell on the process and become preoccupied with it. Picture a block of ice. Say we are trying to break it up, to dissolve it, to transform it, to raise it to a higher level. We don't forcefully break it apart with an ice pick. All we'd have would be many smaller pieces and flakes of ice. It's still ice. Now imagine it melting, imagine it dissolving into water in the warm sunlight. The spiritual nature has such an influence on us. It does not break apart things, it does not do things by violence, it does not leave us the way that we were before, but perhaps broken into pieces. Rather, it transforms us in its radience, it changes us throughout our being, throughout our personality, as an overall influence upon us. We are transformed from within, rather than merely changing ourselves from without. In meditation, we approach the spiritual and dwell in it. We elevate our consciousness above and beyond the petty problems of the personal nature. We let go of the whirl of the outer activities, and enter into inner tranquility. We are refreshed, strengthened, and transformed. We find that a kind thought is vaster than a commanding thought, that a wisdom, a insight, a sense of the void, is much greater than a colorful image or vision. We find ourselves *radiant* rather than *receptive*. And we work on our divine right to be positive, active, living forces for good in the world. In our meditation, as in the events of our day-to-day lives, we practice being self-forgetful, being rooted in a consciousness where our activities are done in pure enjoyment, without a sense of us, personally as doing the activity. This is not to say that there is no sense of personality, no sense of any consciousness in our personal natures. There is still that consciousness, but it is experienced as something extra, something on the side, something incidental to the main thing happening in life. We are now centered in our higher principles, and our experience of life arises from them as the keynote, sounding out throughout our entire seven or ten principles, but them being the most interesting, the most captivating, the most central theme to our experience of life. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 11:34:37 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: psychological key to the SD Brenda was spending some more time on searching THE SECRET DOCTRINE for mention of a psychological key, and came across the following quote. (I did not see it because my search did not include footnotes.) It is from Volume II, in a footnote to the commentary on Stanza I, Beginnings of Sentient Life. "... The teaching is offered as it is understood; and as there are seven keys of interpretation to every symbol and allegory, that which may not fit a meaning, say from the psychological or astronomical aspect, will be found quite correct from the physical or metaphysical." Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 14:58:08 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Re: Globes - a proposition I have a few comments/questions of my own regarding Globes/Planes; any feedback will be appreciated. (a) Are Globes and Planes the same thing? (b) My understanding is that there are Seven planes of the Cosmic Physical Plane (i.e. Physical, Astral, Mental, Buddhic, Atmic, Monadic and Divine). These are also called the seven planes of our solar system. Each one of these has seven subplanes. In turn, these seven planes of our solar system form the Cosmic Physical Plane (which means that there are six other Cosmic planes, about which we know practically nothing). (c) Do we exist simultaneously on all these planes of the solar system simultaneously in the sense that there are counterparts of our 'consciouness' on other planes even though we are normally not aware of them when functioning on the first plane (counting from the bottom i.e. physical plane or Globe D)? Or is it that we can 'partake' in the goings-on at these various planes when we on purpose tune ourselves into them (e.g. during sleep or perhaps meditation)? (d) Our soul or ego is supposed to have an independent existence, on its own plane while we are living the normal waking daily life. My understanding is that our 'meditation' can become the same as that of the soul for a fraction of a second, and that is the true purpose of occult meditation. It is also my understanding that the ego is effectively destroyed at the 4th initiation when one becomes an Arhat, enabling direct contact between the personality and the Monad when in incarnation. (e) What about the Monad, the Dhyan Chohan, who has its own independent existence on its own plane? When 'we' become sufficiently evolved, the Monad is 'released and can go about its own evolution'. I presume that this happens probably at the 6th initiation or something like that... . My question really is the age old one: who am I, if I am not the soul (ego) and not the Monad, even though the teachings tell me to 'act as if' I am my Higher Self (soul at first and Monad later). I can only speculate that through my evolution, as I become more and more refined, the Monad is achieving the purpose for which it got 'entangled' with me: the redemption of the matter of this Solar System, of which I am a part! Waiting to hear other views/Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 15:36:47 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Reappearance of the Christ I'd like to pick up where I left off yesterday in responding to the comment on differences between the teachings of HPB and AAB. I said that there do not appear to be any differences at all in my reading of the SD with the AAB teachings, except for one paragraph that I had read in SD which seemed to be somewhat at odds with what I had learnt from AAB books. This paragraph is the very first one in Chapter XV of Section II, Volume I "On Kwan-Shi-Yin and Kwan-Yin". On further investigation, I find that there is only one line in that paragraph, towards the very end of the paragraph which I had a problem with, where HPB says that 'Only it is not in the Kali Yug, our present terrifically materialistic age of Darkness, the "Black Age" that a new Saviour of Humanity can ever appear.' Now, Kali Yug, according to HPB, started at the death of Sri Krishna, about 3100 BC. Does the above statement mean that HPB did not consider the Christ when He overshadowed Jesus 2000 years ago (during Kali Yug) a 'Saviour of Humanity' ? I am frnakly perplexed by this statement, and'd appreciate any comments at all to clarify what HPB meant. Now, in GASSHO (the electronic Buddhist newsletter available through theos-l) it says that the Lord Buddha made the statement that '...Dharma will survive for 5000 years after which there will be a new type of teaching, to be given by the new Buddha who'd appear around that time.' (I have paraphrased the statement as I do not have it in front of me). This also seems to say that there will be 'Saviours of Humanity' during Kali Yug. Much as I reverence HPB, I think that I have to admit that her statement quoted before is not 'very exact' in the definition of a Saviour of Humanity. Perhaps she meant that the 'greatest Avatar for this Round' will incarnate during the 7th Race. ... I am under the impression that every age of 2560 years (corresponding to each Sun sign) has its Avatar(s). Just like the Christ was the one to inaugurate the Piscean Age 2000 years ago, there will be a new Messiah to inaugurate the emerging Aquarian Age. The information that I have from various books that I have read (primarily Bailey books) indicates that the Christ will re-appear within the next several years. ... the 'day of His reappearance is fixed but the hour is not' meaning that sometime during the next 30 years (by 2025) we should see a momentous event for Humanity, the reappearance of the Christ ... the Christ will eventually take the initiation which will make him the next Buddha, while the Master KH is going to take over the office of the Christ. Let me close this message with another Mantram: The Sons of Men are One, and I am one with them I seek to love, not hate I seek to serve, not exact due service I seek to heal not hurt Let pain bring its due reward of love and light Let the soul control the outer form and life, and all events and bring to light the love that underlies the happenings of the time Let vision come and insight Let the future stand revealed Let inner union demonstrate and outer cleavages be gone Let love prevail Let all men love Thanks for your time, Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 17:18:26 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: angels This is by Brenda Tucker. Sarah: I ran across a story about Balaam and was wondering if there is a connection to your code name or if the story is one that you also heard and if you based your choice of code name on the personage in this story or had heard another story about this character??? An angel stopped the prophet Balaam who was accompanied by a donkey. The donkey saw the angel with drawn sword, became frightened, began to balk, fret, and run away. The prophet caught the animal and beat it mercilessly, as he could not see the angel and did not know the reason for the donkey's behavior. (A BOOK OF ANGELS by Sophy Burnham) Friends: I'm referring to a book that's on the general marketplace called A BOOK OF ANGELS by Sophy Burnham, and the rest of this note is also information taken from this book. So great is the power of angels in the spiritual world that, if I should make known all that I have witnessed in regard to it, it would exceed belief. Any obstruction there that ought to be removed because it is contrary to Divine order the angels cast down or overthrow merely by an effort of the will and a look. - Emanuel Swedenborg HEAVEN AND ITS WONDERS AND HELL Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth unseen, both when we wake and when we sleep. - John Milton PARADISE LOST, IV It is said, and it is true, that just before we are born a cavern angel puts his finger to our lips and says, "Hush, don't tell what you know." This is why we are born with a cleft on our upper lips and remembering nothing of where we came from. - Roderick MacLeish PRINCE OMBRA. Intuition runs in families. We know it can be strengthened or lost and forogtten from disuse. It is SUDDEN knowledge, SUDDEN insight, an instant, unexpected connection, usually only after days or weeks of fruitless work. Intuition is believed by the Asians to be a part of the Akashic records, a river of knowledge that encircles the earth and that certain favored people may dip into. (p. 56) (Not an exact quote.) Zoroaster, or Zarathustra (the name meaning "rich in camels"), was the one who introduced a montheistic deity to ancient Babylon and Assyria, transforming the old gods into archangels. He lived between 1000 and 600 B.C. and protested a religion that was close to the Hindu Vedas and included fire worship, sacrifice, and possibly the worship of the Goddess and of Ba'al or Ba'lim. Zoroaster taught ethics, and like Buddha would do later, emphasized good thoughts, good words, and good deeds. The one Supreme God, Ahura Mazda, is helped by seven amesha spenta, representing seven moral ideas. These are found in various enumerations, with one enumeration as follows: Good Knowledge (or Wisdom), Truth (or The Way), Piety, Salvation, Immortality (or Delight in Beauty), Obedience, and Deserved Good Luck. Wisdom is the protector of the Earth, Truth the protector of Fire, Delight in Beauty is protector of plants, etc. Until Zoroaster's time, the Supreme Being contained within itself both good and evil. With Zoroastrianism came the duality we are familiar with, good and bad waging an uneven battle since good is assured victory. Only about 250,000 Zoroastrians remain today, mostly around Bombay. (p.115-118)(Not an exact quote.) Many cultures hold to it that human souls evolve eventually into protecting angels, as angels themselves evolve to higher and higher forms. Or, as described in this quote from the KORAN, VII: "And He created you, then fashioned you, then told the Angels: Fall ye prostrate before Adam! And they fell prostrate, all save Iblis, who was not of those who make prostration. He said: What hindered Thee that thou did not fall prostrate when I bid thee? (Iblis) said: I am better than he. Thou createdst me of fire, while him Thou didst create of mud. He said: Then go down hence! It is not for Thee to show pride here, so go forth! Lo! Thou art of Those degraded." (p. 136) "In 1259 Aquinas gave a series of lectures on angels at the University of Paris." Since people could not read they came as spectators. "His lectures (15) were written down as he spoke them and formed the foundation of our knowledge about angels for the next eight hundred years." (p. 166-167) Listen to this: "Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite was a Syrian. He wrote four obtuse books of mysticism, full of literary artifice, one being DE HIERARCHIA CELESTI, about the nature and properties of angels. In this he pretended to be Dionysius the Areopagite, the first-century Greek who was converted by Saint Paul at Athens (Acts 17:34). Later he was thought to be the first bishop of Athens, and later still he was identified with Saint Denis of France, until around 1450 it was discovered he was a fraud. To avoid confusion, therefore, he's called the Pseudo- Areopagite, or the Pseudo-Dionysius for short. Nonetheless, his influence in the Middle Ages was enormous, and the best-known hierarchy of angels is his. According to the Pseudo-Dionysius, the three highest angels are the Old Testament seraphim, cherubim, and thrones. The next two triads come from the various lists that Paul poetically tossed off in the first century to the new Christian disciples when he was touring the Mediterranean basin, building a young Church... ... At any rate, and Pseudo-Dionysius arranged the angels into three groupings, using Paul's list, and everyone else took them up: 1. Seraphim, cherubim, and thrones 2. Dominions, virtues, and powers 3. Principalities, archangels, and angels (lowest) SERAPHIM, the highest order, the six-winged ones, surround the throne of God, singing ceaselessly, Holy, Holy, Holy. They are angels of love, light, and fire. CHERUBIM are the guardians of the fixed stars, keepers of celestial records, bestowers of knowledge. In the Talmud cherubim are equated with the order of wheels, also called ophanim. Chief rulers are Ophaniel, Rikbiel, Zophiel, and, before his fall, Satan. THRONES bring God's justice to us. They are sometimes called WHEELS and in the Jewish Kabbalah, CHARIOTS or the MERKABAH. The occult book, the ZOHAR, ranks wheels above seraphim, but other sources place them as cherubim, the whole thing being confused. The ruling prince is Oriphiel or Zabkiel or Zaphiel. DOMINIONS or DOMINATIONS regulate angelic duties. Through them is manifested the Majesty of God. They hold an orb or sceptre as an emblem of authority, and, in Hebraic lore, the chief of this order is named Hashmal or Zadkiel. VIRTUES work miracles on earth. They are bestowers of grace and valor. POWERS stop the efforts of demons to overthrow the world, or else they preside over demons, or perhaps (according to St. Paul) they are themselves evil. Ertosi, Sammael or Camael (depending on the source) is chief of the Powers. PRINCIPALITIES are protectors of religion. Nisroc, in Milton, is "of principalities the prime," and others, according to various sources, are named Requel, Anael, and Cerviel. ARCHANGELS and ANGELS are guardians of people and all physical things." (p.171-175) Rudolf Steiner drew up his own hierarchy of the angels. "Seraphim receive the ideas and aims of the cosmic system from the Trinity. Cherubim transpose these ideas into workable human plans. The Thrones, "figuratively speaking" (he adds), work with humans to put into practice the thoughts received by the seraphim from God and pondered over by the cherubim. After these come dominions, mights (or virtues), and powers, followed by archai, archangels, and angels. ... Every human individual, Steiner says, has an angel which guides that person through incarnation after incarnation. At a certain stage you can ask your angel to reveal your former incarnations. Angels, the lowest on the scale, stand behind each person, a guiding hand on his or her shoulder, and this influence is strongest in childhood. As the person grows older, the angel retreats in order to permit the human's development of freedom and personal individuality between the ages of twenty-five and forty, when the founding of a family and career are uppermost in his or her consciousness. Later, in the middle years, the person is rejoined by the angelic being, as again he or she turns toward understanding of the spiritual dimension. Angels are Water Spirits. They rule a sphere from earth to the moon. Archangels are Fire Spirits, concerned not with individuals but with the evolution of race-souls, folk-souls. They govern the relationship between individual human beings and the whole of a people or a race. Their sphere of influence runs from earth to Mercury. And rising higher in this last triad, we find archai, or spirits of Personality, which govern the relationships of the whole human species on earth. These angels live in waves of time, change their spiritual bodies from age to age, and are the "spirit of the time." They rule as far as Venus. From them come the great beings who descend to earth to lead us. They are the bodhisattvas, yogis, prophets, and saints, who APPEAR to be people but aren't, the appearance being MAYA, or illusion, as everything on this earth, including physical matter, is illusion." COMMENTS This book mentions the Theosophical Society as well as approaching the study of angels from every religion and down through antiquity. There are lots of interesting modern day stories as well. However, it made me form the most negative opinion of the way most people interpret "Theosophy" to mean Ancient Wisdom. This book says "wisdom of the gods" and Steiner's Anthroposophy being related to "wisdom of man," but many people freely interpret theosophy as "ancient wisdom." When I read about Zoroastrianism's amesha spenta and wisdom being related to the earth, I couldn't help but shun this name "Theosophy" for The Thesophical Society's motto: "There is no religion higher than truth." If there were a choice between "ancient wisdom" and "truth," I'd gladly lean toward truth. I read a beautiful quote the other day, not about the delivering of truth to the earth in one of the many forms of knowledge, but about one of the tests of truth being that it is really a gift of truth if it is made known for all men to partake of and benefit from. This would include not only the Path of Occultism, but also most scientific discoveries that are then used to make life more blessed. The only reason I can think that the angels were asked to prostrate before man was that it was a great work and a great plan for evolution, not that the angels weren't as good, but so the angels could appreciate their wholeness and the thought that all life, including the earth could benefit from man's existence. It isn't proper for an angel to think that they are capable of any and all work and that there isn't a need for other beings.. Their field of endeavor may be limited to only a certain type of task. I didn't think Steiner's hierarchy was different from Pseudo- Dionysius' in the basic classifications, perhaps it was different in the way it described the functioning and activity of the classes primarily. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1993 19:18:37 -0500 From: Andrew Rooke Subject: Guidelines for living the Life Over the past few weeks, several correspondents to the list have mentioned the application of theosophical principles to daily life and especially, the Chela life. Theosophy is often criticized for being an impracticle philosophy and the subject of lounge room discussion rather than providing vital guidelines for living. I wish simply to draw attention to the following books in which theosophical teachers speak specifically of the requirements for those who aspire to be the "servants of the servants" in the great work of uplifting human consciousness : Light on the Path and Through the Gates of Gold by Mabel Collins Letters that have helped me by William Q. Judge The Voice of the Silence by HPB The Path of Compassion by G de Purucker This practical advice is often overlooked in academic debate on the technical teachings and the history of the TS. With good wishes to all, Andrew Rooke From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 01:14:02 -0500 From: Donald DeGracia <72662.1335@compuserve.com> Subject: to Arvind Arvind: <)Are Globes and Planes the same thing? > I am not as familiar with the idea of globes as Jerry S. is, but it is my understanding that the globes are not the planes. A plane is said to be "a condition of nature". My understanding of globes is that they represent the evolutionary stages of life in this Solar System. The planes are more "universal" then than the globes, which are particular to the evolutionary chain of the solar system, i.e. the solor logos. Read "Far Journeys" by Robert Monroe (DoubleDay Books) to get some sense of whats going on out in the cosmic planes. Its not that the cosmic planes are inaccessible to us humans, its more that, because of our belief systems, we limit our perceptions, and thus are unaware of, not only the local planes (i.e. the seven planes, which make the cosmic physplane), but of the goings on of the cosmic planes. One of the problems with theosophical teachings is that they cast a mystique about the cosmic planes (and even the higher planes of our local 7 planes) that somehow you have to be a buddha or something to understand these cosmic or higher planes. This just isn't true. We operate on *all* the planes simultaneously and its just a matter of learning to recognize this. Yes to both of your questions. See, our physical consciousness is but a subset of a greater consciousness. Other consciousness here in the physplane are also linked into the same greater consciousness that you are. These consciousness could be thought of as your physical counterparts. As well, there are many, many facets of your consciousness that never express themselves in the physplane but only manifest on the higher planes. These you may sometimes encounter in your dreams. What you have to realize is that your normal waking consciousness is only the smallest tip of a vast iceburg of consciousness. As a matter of fact, your very consciousness touches all other consciousness in all of infinity. If you probed deep enough into your psyche, you could, for example, find me very, very deep inside yourself. And vice versa, you are very, very deep inside of me. There is no simple pattern to the interrelationships of consciousness. There are as many types of patterns of interrelationship of consciousness as there are conscious beings. The key to discovering the truth of these statements lies in having a very flexible mind. Your soul, or Ego (the capitol E is important here) is exactly this greater consciousness I speak of above. It operates under terms and conditions we cannot easily understand from our vantage point as human beings. I can only warn you to be wary when you talk of your soul, for you are a small part of it. it is much greater than you, Arvind the human. Arvind the human can expand his consciousness and touch other parts of the soul that Arvind is but an outgrowth of. In this case, both Arvind and the soul change. Both gain a deeper appreciation of their relationship. Now, you must be careful when saying that "the ego is destroyed". You must define what you mean by ego. If you are refering to your physical personality, to Arvind the human, then you must realize that this personality is an organ of the physical body and an outgrowth of that body. Your personality/ego will fade soon after your death. However, your personality is only a mere "persona", a mask assumed by the soul. And again, this soul operates in terms very difficult for us humans to understand. The soul is a myriad humans simultaneously, both incarnate and discarnate, and all the relationships between these humans, and all the things these humans interact with. If you are healthy and balanced, you will not try to get rid of your ego, for this is like cutting off your hand. Your ego in physical life is a functional part of your anatomy as a physical creature. What is necessary is to understand just *what* your ego is, and what is its function. With this knowlege you can then have a healthy and balanced ego. All this talk of "destroying the ego" in actuality refers to a process of *opening* up your ego, your personality, opening it up to the myriad of interrelationships of consciousness that provide the, most often invisible, substrate for your existence. It is a process of opening, not destroying. The only thing you need to destroy are delusions and bad ideas, bad ideas about yourself and the world and how you fit into the world (using the word "world" in the very most broadest sense). And the answer to this question is: everything! Ultimately, Arvind, behind that body, and behind that mind of yours is the whole rest of everything. And you are intimately tied to it ALL. And in this ALL, what you are is a unique and particular viewpoint of the ALL within itself. You must realize, reality has an infinity of levels. And somehow, you touch all these levels. When you really open up to the essence that underlies your existence as Arvind, you will realize that all the ideas like Theosophy, or any religion, or any particular philosophy, none of these ideas can capture but an infintesmal sliver of what you REALLY are. These ideas are but guide posts to point out directions in which your being unfolds. Each is true to an extent, but each is false when you take that view to be the only view. Again, the magic trick here is to be OPEN, especially to be open to your own inner expereinces, your thoughts, your daydreams, the ideas that pass through your mind, be aware of what goes on around you, what you feel, hear and see. And do not make the mistake of trying to fit your experince into preconcieved notions. All of your expereinces are motifs in the symphony of your unique existence. And as you probe deeper and become aware of more and more in your being, you will very naturally come to understand the nature of your existence. Again, the trick is: be open. Best to you, Don From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 10:57:56 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: globes and planes The subject of globes and planes seems simply, on first glance, but contains some profound, deeply esoteric truths. It involves the nature of space and the mystery of the manifest universe, the great tree of life. It can be confusing, since *globe* and *plane* can be used interchangably, in some discussions, since our only experience of a plane is through the globe on it, and there has to be a place to experience every type of consciousness. The planes are a spectrum of consciousness. A single plane contains a particular scale of consciousness, covering the whole possibility of experience. In a plane, there is a range of subplanes that covers the seven, ten, or twelve basic types of consciousness. There is a fractal nature to the planes, where we see the entire whole represented in any single part. A single plane embraces the entirity of life. Break it apart into its subplanes, and each of them, as well, contain the whole. Moving in the opposite direction, we find that our physical plane is one of seven, comprising the lowest cosmic plane. And it is one of seven of a yet bigger scale. And there is no end to this, going bigger and bigger, or going smaller and smaller, we never find a top most or a bottom most level to things. The planes are a spectrum of conconsciousness, they represent the seven principles of consciousness, in both a universal sense, where we can talk about, for instance, the universal nature of Manas, and in a particular sense, where we talk about our seven principles, as we have them, here on Globe D earth. Like space itself, the planes are not places, not worlds, not a body of any cosmic being. They do not occupy any particular position. They are a *condition*, an experience, a mode of functioning, not a thing, not a object, not a place where beings exist. It is the globes, the forms, the bodies, that are the places where beings start to appear. The globes are the staging areas for manifestation, for existence. When we speak of having an experience on a particular plane, it is us, on the globe on that plane, that has the experience. Looking at the globe chain, we see that each globe is at a particular level, a particular point, on each of the four lower planes. When we go to the other globes, we experience the four planes at the point or level at which the corresponding globe or globes are at. The experience of the planes, besides being focused to where the globes actually are, at the present, is also qualifies by the direction of the life energies of the globe. Globes on the downward arc have an different experience of life and existence than the globes on the upward arc. And a full experience on any one of the globes is had by us as a fully-embodied, seven principled being, although the seven principles that we clothe ourselves in is different in each of the globes. We have a different set of skandhas, a different set of egos and souls built up to represent us, as Human Monads, where we visit those globes. There is a part of our constitution that is more at home on one of the globes than the rest, a part that has particularly evolved forth from with based upon our experience thereon. The quality of life and the workings of the laws of nature are based upon the plane that the globe resides on. But when we say that a globe resides on a plane, it may be a somewhat misleading figure of speech, because planes are not *places*, they are *states*. At this point in time, our evolution is here, on Globe D, and we do not fully embody ourselves on other globes, should we pass through them. We visit the other globes, possibly in meditation, in sleep, in death, and in initiation. But the visits are generally one of a feeling of the influence of the globes, and not an actual physical presence on them. We partake of the consciousness of the globes, but don't go there, and take on bodies on them, except in the process of hastened evolution in treading the Path. The natural sweep of our life energies takes us through the globes, in sequence, from the first to the last, then to our source, and this sweep of life is really the flow of life energies of our world, our planet, its sutratman or thread soul, the sweep of its monadic essence. Each globe along the way is a center or focus of consciousness of our planet, the host of our manifest life, and nothing exists outside of it for us, as Human Monads. As Spiritual Monads, which we will be someday in the distant future, our consciousness takes in more, but for now the scope and range of our existence is limited to not only a single planet, but even more so, being limited to but a single globe. Looking at a globe, it does not contain planes of consciousness. It does not have its own higher planes, apart from the globe chain. A world or globe does not contain consciousness or space, but rather is *a being* at a particular level of development, experiencing a particular state of consciousness. And the state of consciousness that our Globe D is experiencing is the plane on which it resides. The planes are not other places to go to, the globes or worlds are. Everything exists on a globe or world of some scale, in the body of some greater being. There is a great tree of life, reaching upwards without end, wherein each existing being comes into manifestation in and through an already-manifest greater being. Nothing exists outside, apart from this tree of life. For us, there would be no existence apart from our globe chain. When we talk about an infinitude of planes, about an endless series of bigger and greater planes above and beyond what we know in our experience of life, we are talking about the fractal nature of consciousness, about the reflection of the macrocosm in the microcosm, about how there are other realms of experience on a wider scale that ours. A solar system, a universal solar system, and even greater astronomical bodies represent larger scales of existence, larger than we experience in our live on Globe D, our physical earth. One day, we will have progressed where our scope of life is at that level, but that is in the far distance future. Within our natures, we have no particular self for a plane, because planes are not places, they are conditions of consciousness. We have, rather, an ego or self, the karmic seeds for potential existence, for each of the globes of our earth. When we think about the infinitude of planes, we are considering the infinite possible variations of consciousness, which are possible, while in embodied existence on any of the globes. But to fully experience consciousness, complete consciousness, we have to be fully clothed in all our seven principles, we need all the ingredients that go into making up conscious existence. Our personal consciousness, as we know it here on earth, our current personality, is what we've made ourselves into being. It is us, until we infill it with with the higher, until we bring self-conscious awareness of our higher principles into play. The physical existence that we experience here on the earth is not limited, a handicap, something unplesant that we need to get through as quickly as possible in order to exist on some other plane, in order to escape to our true home. The physical existence that we experience here on the earth is our learning experience, our self-evolved place of life and growth, our true home. Until we awaken and transform ourselves, *here*, we are not ready nor capable of existence elsewhere. Here on the earth, there is not a limit to our consciousness. The limit is not our physical bodies. It is ourselves that set the limits, by the scope or reach that we allow ourselves. All the higher faculties are available to us, as we currently stand, in embodied existence. We do not have to try to go to someother plane in order to find a higher consciousness. The reverse is rather true, we cannot function on a higher plane until and unless we've already acquired that consciousness, here on this plane. When we unfold the higher faculties in ourselves, we have a *consciousness* on the other planes, an experience of the nature of consciousness that corresponds to those planes, even as we continue to exist on Globe D, with its own consciousness focused on the physical. At a much later period of human evolution, at a time in the distant future measured in the millions of years, we as humanity will move on to Globe E, and experience embodied existence on a globe wherein the apparent laws of nature function differently, function according to a different quality of consciousness. The difference of experience that we will have at that time is in regards to our outer personalities. Above and beyond the personal, though, is the impersonal, in which we can experience forms of consciousness that transcend those that our outer circumstances seem to limit us to. Even a Mahatma, in his fifth to seventh initiation, short of Buddhahood, is a man in a body of flesh in this world. He is not a nonphysical cosmic being. He may have learned to paralyze the body for a time and to function elsewhere, and for a time experience other worlds, but his life is here, as a man, as a member of the Human Kingdom. He is still many steps short of final graduation, some steps which are not possible to take in the Fourth Round. When we hear of an adept reading from the astral light, or uncovering information in the Asashic Records, we are not talking about higher planes, nor other globes, but rather the aura, the atmosphere, the less material aspect of our Globe D earth. Our globe is not merely a ball of rock and gas, circling the sun in space. It is a whole spectrum of being, from the unmanifest, through all the seven principles, down to the physical, which we see as our world. The material side of it also spans a whole spectrum from the unmanifest down through solid matter. The material side is rooted in Asasha, reaching down into the astral light, then finnally, in its most concrete form, becomes the world as we know it. This spectrum of physical existence, including the astral light, is not a "astral plane", and it is not populated with whole classes of fully-manifested beings. It is a formative womb in which the outer world is created. It contains images and impressions of things to be and of things that have been. It can be perceived and manipulated, but it is not a separate plane or world, apart from our Globe D earth, which can be independently existed on. It may be possible for an adept to temporarily project his consciousness into the astral light, and perceive it, but this projection of consciousness is not a full, embodied existence, it is partial and temporary visit. The astral light is populated by elementals, which carry out the will of nature in the outer world. The elementals are the three classes of beings seeking further material existence, and the direction of their consciousness is downward. They contemplate the physical world and dwell on and direct the activities of the laws of nature. They build the clouds, they shape the mountains, they bring conscious direction to the natural phenomena of life. The Dyhani Chohans also dwell one step removed from the physical, but much information has not been given out about how and where they function. It may seem confusing at times to pull together all the mystery teachings that we have been given, especially considering their fragmentary nature. The rounds and races, the globe chains, the planes of nature, the hierarchical nature of and the grand tree of life--all these are but bits and pieces of the grand truth. A study and contemplation of the Teachings is not easy, because we are required to penetrate into a realm of thought that our regular, customary brain-mind is is unfamiliar with, we are required to go into uncharted terrorities of learning and knowledge. We must awaken a higher form of perception, one that penetrates directly, a form of knowing that is different from what we currently possessess, a form of buddhic insight. And no one can do it for us. No one can take us to the knowledge that awaits us. We must do it ourselves, we must make the effort on our own. We must go where we have never been before and come back wiser, richer, better than before, bearing gifts for others. For no grand Truth is truly received until it has been passed on to others. Nothing is gained for oneself alone. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 16:02:19 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: levels of meaning to globes and planes When we consider the globes and planes, it is easy to fall back to the commonly-held belief that the planes are places that we go to. But our functioning on higher planes is not thorough evolved bodies, there are not worlds *on the different planes* waiting for us to explore them. The higher planes are not places to visit. It is the *higher globes* that are the places, the worlds, the earths that we will one day have embodied existence on, e.g. fully developed consciousness in and through a physical body. There are a number of levels of meaning to the nature of other worlds. As we progress in our understanding, as we contemplate the deep truths, we come to realization after realization. We move forward and find that we have come see further truths. We find that our old understandings are not wrong, just incomplete, just misunderstood because of missing something. We start off with the idea that nothing is real, not even what we see before us. We have progressed beyond this level of appreciation of life, and may only experience it if our higher natures are paralyzed, like in severe depression or drunkeness. The next stage would consider what we see about us as real, but only what we see. This is like animals generally experience things. There is no memory or appreciation of other events in life that qualify our experience of the moment. We are driven by external stimuli and are not self-directed in thought. The third stage admits a tangible, objective physical world, but would say that it is all that there is. There are events apart from ourselves, and they are physical. Everything is due to known physical processes. This is the level that many people still experience life at. A fourth stage would have extensions of the physical world, to allow for paranormal phenomena, but seeks to still explain it according to physical laws, as extensions of the laws of physics, quantum mechanics, nonlinear dynamics, and does not admit to other aspects of existence. Then comes a stage where other worlds are admitted, worlds that coexist with our earth, but are entirely non-physical. These worlds interpenetrate our earth, and have their own populations, including humans, animals, planets, and so forth. These worlds have their own laws, and nature is a bit different in each one of them. We can visit them in dreams, in illness, and go to them to live when we die. This fifth stage is still a form of materialism, but now we have more than one physical world, but everything is still due to the action of bodies on their appropriate planes of existence. In the sixth stage, we learn to disassociate the idea of the seven principles of consciousness from the planes. The principles are not bodies on different planes. We learn about monads, egos, and souls, and how they are different from the principles and elements of consciousness. We have full existence, as a seven-principled being, on each plane. Going deeper, we then learn that the planes are not places, not an infinitude of levels or layers of physical existence, like a fourth dimension to physical existence with each level along the fourth dimension being another plane. We go deeper and learn that the globes are the places on the different planes that we visit, that there are discrete places to exist, and when we exist on any such globe, we have our full seven-principled self. And the eighth level would be where we learn of the tree of life, and how we come into manifestation through the *self* of a universe, where the universe lends us its Atman and qualifies our existence. We learn the nature of the Boundless and how the unmanifest relates to it. We learn about the highest triad, the three upper-most principles of consciousness. There are level after level to what we may learn about the theosophical teachings! It is an endless voyage of discovery, full of wonder and magic. We can spend a lifetime in exploration and never reach the end, for we are tapping into the Wisdom of the Masters, and through them into that of the Dhyani Chohans themselves! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 00:29:49 -0500 From: OSMAR DE CARVALHO Subject: Pluto on T.S. chart To Louise C. Mead (with great delay...) Br> Your looking for events and your missing the pattern! The main Br> alinement in 94 is the continuing play of uranus and neptune in Br> capricorn 1 conjunction in 93 and 2 in 94 and a Jupiter Pluto Br> alinement on Dec 2 94. Pluto Jupiter happens every 12 years or so. Br> Uranus and Aloha Louise!! Here in Brazil we were studying the birth chart of Adyar T.S., Nov/11/1875, and we became very preoccupied because of Pluto transit in the T.S. Sun. As we saw that Pluto is both ruller of the Sun and fifth house (creativity) of our society, and originally it was in opposition to the Sun, we understood the revolutions it brought to the society. One example was the Pluto transit over its ascendent, Cancer, between 1927/29, when was dissolved the Order of the Star, wich transformed the external expression of the society. Our previsions indicates a turnover, for good or bad, in the physical vitality of the T.S., with great effect over the older members. A turning to the chief objective of the society, the regeneration of the mankind. This could bring many tension points given the various perspectives of the work. This transit will suceed from the birthday of T.S. to the end of 1994, and will afect all the national sections, groups and Lodges whose birth is in Nov/17 of any year. We called this crisis moment, and of opportunity, the "Theosophical Apocalypse", and generated a great controversy when an article with these title and contents was published in a theosophical brazilian newsletter, The THEODIDATA, for the short sighted theosophists understood we were saying that the T.S. would perish, when the correct perspective is that it will to regenerate. I do believe this was the chief reason for its foundation in Scorpio. Warm tropical hugs from Brazil! Osmar de Carvalho From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 13:17:05 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Pluto on T.S. chart Greetings from Virginia. My own birthday is 11/18 so I have been preoccupied with the Pluto/Sun transit. Publication of my book next year seems to be the main expression of it. Because Jupiter is passing through Scorpio in 94 and hitting 25/26 degrees at end of year, I'm hoping the book will be seen as a positive event for the T.S. as well as for me. See theos-news for the publisher's catalog announcement. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 15:43:26 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the masters and the work When we think of chelas and the Masters, the Theosophical Society comes to mind as an example of the work that they do, for it was a project that they started. The official reason given for the founding of the T.S. in New York City, in 1875, was to brings the ideas of the orient to the west. This was the purpose that was stated at that time, and it was at a later date that it adopted the three objects that we now know it to have. H.P. Blavatsky, a chela of the Masters, was sent to found the society. It was an experiement by the Masters K.H. and M., although their teacher, the Maha-Chohan, would have preferred waiting a few more years. The attempt was to open the door to some of the arcane secrets, to stimulate receptive minds of men and to turn about the tide of materialism in the world. There was another effort of the Masters to give a push towards things spiritual in the west, where in the last quarter of each century, since the time of Tsong-Ka-Pa, a special effort would be made. This was a second effort that worked out through the Theosohical Society. A third effort was based upon a larger cycle of 2160 years, being 1/12 of the precessional cycle of the earth. The next 2160 year cycle is about to begin--and I would say that it might start at 2182 A.D., but I'll have to defer giving the reasons why at the moment. The work of the Theosophical Movement plays a role in assisting establishing the keynote for the next such cycle. It should be noted that the 2160-year cycle represents one particular subrace. And although humanity as a whole could be said to be in a single subrace at a time, in another sense there is an overlapping of the races, so that there could be other 2160-year cycles, different ones, starting at other parts of the world, and not all with the same timing. The work of H.P.B. helped initiate the new 2160-year cycle in the west, but other such cycles are not necessarily synchronized. Consider the menstrual cycle of a young woman. It is tied to the lunar month. Other women will also have their cycles, also tied to the moon, but not necessarily synchronized, except for women who live in close association. The same is true of subraces. Their cycles are based upon the greater rhythms of the earth and celestial objects, but are not necessarily synchronized, *except when they live in close association.* A movement like Theosophy can have multiple purposes, it can react to and express several influences. And when we speak of Theosophy, we refer to the Theosophical Movement, not a particular Theosophical Society, because there are numerous societies and a far-reaching affect that touches many more people that the combined memberships of the various organizations. The Theosophical Society as an organization had already begun to fragment in the 1880's, when H.P.B. and Col. Olcott could not agree, and she continued her work through an Esoteric Society, while he had control of the outer organization. It further fragmented in the mid 1890's, when the American Section, under W.Q. Judge, broke from Adyar, and there were two societies. And then there were further and further splits in the following years. There were at least four influences working through the early T.S., four projects or activities or efforts to reach out to mankind. There was the last quarter of the century push. There was the project of K.H. and M.'s to enlighten the west. There was some ground work for the next 2160-year cycle. And there were larger cycles involved as well. The intent was to reach out and elevate the thought life of the members, of the students, and through them to have an influence--one influence, one of many influences--on mankind. The project of K.H. and M. was not based on prophecy. There was nothing about it that was foreordained and predestined. Everything is not laid out, the entire blueprint for the future, in some plan, some document, some book. We cannot look to quotes to tell us the future of the work anymore than Christians can look to the book of Revelation for *real* information about what will happen in the future. The work of the Masters could change at any time based upon its effects and the state of the world. When we consider the T.S., we have but a single project of two Masters. The other work that they do, and the work of all the other Masters is entirely another matter. The Masters act as a Guardian Wall against the destructive outside influences that could harm mankind. They also help protect us against ourselves, against our own karma, by helping keep it from all hitting us at once and destroying us! They do not interfere in karma, telling us what to think or do. And they most definitely are not involved in politics or activities that involve a lot of passion, anger, or competition--at least on a regular basis. They might not concern themselves with the day-to-day operation of a particular country, although they may be behind the initiation of such dramatic events as the founding of the U.S. They are men, in bodies of flesh and bones, and only realize their highest state or nature when the lower self is paralyzed. They are not floating around like balloons on some higher plane of the earth, but are here in embodied existence. If they are not on this earth, then they are in embodied existence on another globe. They are still men, but are fifth-round men. They have become truely human, rather than simply being men swept along by the animal nature, as are fourth-round humanity. They can be found in every nation, and mingle among men to carry on their business. They do, though, have a spiritual home, called Shambhala, which is a *physical* place, a place where the Buddha resides. That place is physical but not physical, it is as though veiled or dematerialized, but very real and substantial nevertheless. They are not godlike in powers, not all-knowing nor all-seeing. And they still have human personalities. They have attributes, faults, characteristics of personality, like any of us. Perhaps some even smoke? They can make mistakes in judgement too, and are perfect by no means. They are not, though, involved infamily life, marriage, the raising of their own children. Their personal life is centered around service to all, to accomplishing the greatest good. They never think in terms of personal benefit. They do not acquire possessions for themselves, only for the good of the work, and would give away all in a moment without any hesitation where it to help. They maintain a cool, calm, tranquil temperament, as a general rule, although differences in personality could have come with some anger, impatience, or other failings. The basic rule that they follow is to not exhaust the life energies to accomplish a goal, to achieve results with the minimal expenditure of energy. Because of this, they have a much longer lifespan than us, not out of any special magic, but rather through a conservation of the natural life energies, of Prana. They do not use more force than needed to accomplish an end. They would not materialize a letter now, when there's the telephone and fax. They do not project their mayavi rupa, with a great expenditure of energy, to accomplish something that coould easily be done in the mail, in person, or through a chela or helper. Their work is to inspire people spiritually, not to amaze them with penomena, and in our materially advanced world, where we can talk to someone on the other side of the world, or fly there in a day, they may have little need to use phenomena to accomplish their ends. They study the theosophical Teachings, even as we do, but their studies are far advanced of anything that we may ever know. Even so, they may study for many years before even starting a study of such simple, apparently simply, doctrines as that of cycles. They are men, but men whom have become truly human. The higher faculties inspire their lives. But they are not above and beyond personal karma. They still have personalities, and have established relationships with other people; they still have sertain personal habits or rhythms of life. But they seek to minimize the ties that they forge, since these ties can bind and restrict the work that they can do. They are free of the unconscious compulsion to seek rebirth, but are not fully advanced. They can reincarnate at will, and could enter the body of a dying child to become their next life, but they do not yet stand at the threshold of nirvana, and do not have the option, yet, of entering therein. (That threshold is not approached until the seventh initiation.) They have taken at least the fifth initiation, and can go to the other globes and experience other planes of consciousness at will. And the next stage for their progress would be to become Bodhisattvas, then Buddhas, as they become Sixth Rounders. Becoming a Sixth Rounder is not possible at this time, and only a few have been able to do so, and this is due to a *mystery* about which we are not given the details. As a Sixth Rounder, though, one has reached the stage where he becomes a living agent for his own inner god, where the inner god acts as a directing and active Higher Self, rather than simply functioning in the background of one's life. There are ten initiations, and many more Rounds to experience, before we may graduate from the Human Kingdom, and move on to the next, the lowest of the Dhyani-Chohanic Kingdoms. We either graduate and move on, or fail in some way--there is no multiple selection of pathways to go on to, like described in some books. The idea that some writers have that there are many types of experience open to one, upon graduation from the Human Kingdom, where one has perhaps seven different types of existence to pick between, is incorrect. This idea has shown up in some theosophical books, because their authors were not fully grounded in the core Teachings. The mistakes of one writer were carried on and repeated by others, as new students read them then pass them on in their own books in turn. In a while, there is a whole body of literature and following to the original misunderstandings. Many branches of the theosophical family tree originated this way, with slight misunderstandings that became amplified over time until the overall philosophy has changed. Right now, it is a respectible thing to be keeping up with humanity, with the human lifewave, to holding our own and the race as a whole is spiritually progressing. In later Rounds, the climb will be steeper, it will become increasing hard to keep up, more and more of us will drop out, until some of us, how many I cannot say, will reach the goal, and have become potential Dhyani Chohans. We have, then, those whom make it and become Dhyani Chohans, and those whom drop out along the way, whom enter nirvana and resume their human evolution in the next planetary manvanatara. These account for all but a few, the failures, those who attain through the cultivation of evil, through the treading of the Left Hand Path, personal self-destruction. These unfortunate few achieve a nirvana of horror, a avichi nirvana, resulting from the destruction of their human ego. They then have to restart their evolution through the Kingdoms of nature again, starting over from the beginning as Elementals. The Masters, then, are those of us humans whom not only have kept up with the lifewave, but have outraced us by a Round. They have cultivated their true human nature, Manas, which most of us will only realize in perhaps hundreds of millions of years to come! Were we to meet a Master, and look at him, we would see a physical body like that had by any other man. There is nothing miraculous about his physical form. It does not have unearthly beauty. It does not float in the air. It is not surrounded by a visible aura of glowing colors. We could look at that body and wonder how could such a person dare think himself to be a Master! We might not see the inner man, and be misled by outer appearances. The nature of one, whether he is a Master or not, is determined by his inner nature, and the outer form by his personal karma. Now say that we could meet one. Then what do we do? What is the benefit to us? And why would he want to see us? There is not special merit attained by such a personal acquaintance. It would be no different that meeting a stranger on the bus, and chatting for a few minutes, someone that we don't know but met in passing. It would be like seeing the Himalayan Mountains in person, or visiting the holy lands, an external physical event that in itself confers no special benefit. What would one say a Master? Why would he think that what he might hear the Master say would be special, a treasure to him? Why is such a meeting necessary? Anything that we deserve in life, that we have coming to us, is automatically drawn to us. There are no gifts from outside; we only get and understand what we evoke from within. Would meeting a Master make Theosophy seem more real, and give us renewed faith, energy, and enthusiasm? Not really. If our beliefs are based upon external validation, if they require repeated external confirmation to reassure us, if they are not deeply rooted from within, then such a meeting would do us but passing good. Any inspiration arises *from within*, from knowing the spiritual through personal experience, and not from meeting special people, nor from seeing wonders. Seeking outside, finding some external object that we think will give us something, we fool ourselves, but not very well. We really know that we're not going after the truth, that we're avoiding it, when we find things to use as excuses for the lack of inner growth. There are a lot of *if only's* that we use to put off our inner work. If only I could astral project! If only I could meet and know a Master! If only I could see some phenomena to *prove* to me that it all was true, like getting a Mahatma letter! Or if only I could have some paranormal power. These are all external things, experiences to have or attributes to add to the personality, but are do not address the real question of making the consciousness of the spiritual a part of our everyday life. They ignore our responsibility to our own self-directed, self-initiated evolution, and our duty to selfless service of others. The Masters help the world by indirect influences and by contacts with people that inspire them to *change themselves.* Like Santa Claus bringing presents in secret, they bring inspiration and stimulate self-awakening in people without drawing attention to themselves. We could meet them on the street and not know them. If we apply the core concepts of Theosophy, and the keys that we have been given, we might be able to come to some understanding of what they do in the world, apart from the push behind the Theosophical Movement. Besides the work that they do themselves, their chelas do work in the world as well, and some like H.P.B. end up with a high degree of visibility. Most of the work, though, would not call attention to itself. And in addition to the chelas, are many of us, as students of Theosophy, perhaps yet another class of participants in the work. With the same desire to progress and to be of service, but perhaps a lower standing, a lesser degree of self-unfoldment, we might call ourselves helpers, assistants to the chelas. But we are not limited to that, for with the right degree of awakening, with the right openess to the spiritual side of life, we too can be chelas and assist directly with the work. The limitations that we face in life are not externally imposed. No one else holds us back. The limitation that faces is us ourselves. We limit the scope, the reach, the extend of our consciousness and our influence in the world. As we dwell in the vast, lofty, uplifting thoughts of the Esoteric Philosophy, our natures open up and flower. And we too become participants in the work. We too becomes sources of that which is good, and beautiful, and true, and make the world a better place! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 16:21:55 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: forthcoming book Announcement in the forthcoming SUNY Press Summer/Fall Catalog THE MASTERS REVEALED: Madame Blavatsky and the Myth of the Great White Lodge/ K. Paul Johnson "The author has transferred the discussion of Blavatsky's sources from the realm of the mythical to the historical. He has given us a well-researched series of capsuled biographies of persons from whom Blavatsky learned, and the nature of her relationship with each of them. His work brings reasoned conclusions into an area characterized by vituperative and polarized scholarship. He sets his limits well. He has not overstretched his mark nor made excessive claims for his conclusions. Readers will be fascinated, as I was, to see basic profiles of historical personalities behind Morya and Koot Hoomi, as well as to gain some understanding of the way Blavatsky wove together many strains of esoteric teaching."-- Hal W. French, University of South Carolina "There is darn little non-partisan writing about Theosophy and this book fills a real need. Johnson shows that the Theosophical movement is intertwined with the intellectual and political history of its time. He has marshalled an impressive body of evidence to show that the Theosophical Masters are neither disembodied spirits nor are they fictions but are specific historical personages whose identities were disguised for various reasons."-- James Burnell Robinson, University of Northern Iowa The existence of Madame Blavatsky's occult "Masters" has been fiercely debated for more than a century. Although scores of books have been written about her, none has focused on the historical identities of these elusive teachers. This book profiles 32 of Blavatsky's hidden sponsors, including leaders of secret societies in Europe and America, religio-political reformers in Egypt and India, and even British government agents. The milieu in which she carried out her spiritual quest is vividly revealed as a hotbed of revolutionary plots and secret coalitions. But beyond all the politics was a genuine spiritual awakening of global significance. A volume in the SUNY series in Western Esoteric Traditions David Appelbaum, editor State University of New York Press (pub. date July 1994) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 17:01:18 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: In my thoughts Several persons/topics have been in my thoughts in the last few days. I hope to address some of these in this message in addition to replying to Jerry H-E's last message (which I will probably do separately, although there may be several points in this message related to HPB/AAB comparison). On Meditation Many thanks to Eldon for the contributions on meditation. We have been told that all three - study, service and meditation - are necessary in the current age for discipleship service. Meditation can perhaps be defined as really an an effort to 'live as the soul' i.e. to express the qualities of the soul - light, love, selflessnes to name a few - consciously during daily living. The part about consciously 'living every moment as the soul' is ok (at least I understand what I am supposed to do) but the problem I am having at the moment is that when I sit down to meditate, I already know what I am going to turn my thoughts on, nay I even know exactly what my thoughts are going to be during the meditation period. Perhaps I have come to this condition because of warnings about being 'fully conscious, alert during meditation, in order to avoid developing the lower psychic capabilities like automatic writing or channeling'. I have a tough time understanding how to shut off the mind and yet being fully alert, 'receptive' type of meditation being discouraged. Any comments will be welcome! Donald DeGracia/Eldon Tucker Thank you very much for your explanation of Globes/Planes and related topics. We did not touch upon the controversy between Sinnett and Blavatsky regarding 'the earth chain' (I believe that Sinnett thought that Mars and Venus are part of the Earth chain and HPB did not, something like that...). When you get a chance, perhaps you can mention something about how chains, and 'human' monads fit into this scheme. I read somewhere that there are 65 Billion human monads (out of which some 5 Billion are in incarnation at this time) on the earth chain, many of them have not ever incarnated into human form so far in this Second Solar System... Brenda /Eldon Tucker Thank you once again, for coming to my rescue with that quote from a footnote in SD on the 'psychological key'. What AAB calls 'psychology' is not the normal (currently understood) discipline that is taught in our academic schools but rather 'esoteric' aspects of a human being, from the angle of his soul. I'd classify it along with the 7th key in Eldon's classification (i.e. Atma-Vidya is the psychological key to SD). John Mead and All those who have read GASSHO What is the possibility that we can come up with a similar electronic on-line system for theosophical teachings? John, are you planning to send a copy of the postings to TSA headquarters (perhaps in hard copy format) so as to provide them some input for instituting self-study courses, with help from an on-line teacher via this network? John Algeo, the new head of TSA seems to be very much oriented towards offering courses to all those interested and what better system can we have that reaches all remote locations than this network (I have even seen e-mail from India and Taiwan, not to mention European countries and Australia etc.)? Is there an e-mail address for anyone at TSA headquarters (or other similar esoteric organizations)? Jim Meier Thanks for another wonderful card! Where did you purchase these? We hope to send you a Card containing the Great Invocation in Gold/Blue soon. And if you happen to be in this area some time, please call me at 214 867-0101 (Res) or (214) 867-0101 so we can get together! We have the TSA regional get-together in Dallas in June 94. Will you be attending that? Mantram I have not let any opportunity pass by without writing down one of the Mantrams that I know by heart! Unless otherwise stated, all these have been taken from the Bailey books, I do believe that many of these are English translations of ancient Mantrams (from the Indian Vedas and othe scriptures) although I saw them for the first time (in this incarnation!) in the Bailey books. This below is supposed to be a version of the translation of the famous Gayatri Mantram. O Thou who giveth sustenance to the Universe From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 17:59:44 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Pluto on T.S. chart 1994 looks like a very good year indeed for the TS. I ran a transit program and found, other than the ambiguous Pluto/Sun conjunction, 22 positive transits compared to 5 negative and one neutral. FYI they are in chronological order Pluto trine Midheaven 1/14, Uranus trine Pluto 1/18, Saturn sextile Neptune 2/6, Neptune trine Pluto 3/3, Uranus sextile Sun 3/11, Saturn trine Mercury 3/22, Pluto trine midheaven (again) 4/18, Saturn square Venus 4/23, Jupiter conjunct Mercury 5/30, Neptune trine Pluto 6/20, Uranus sextile Sun (again) 6/22, Pluto conjunct Sun (again) 7/25, Jupiter conjunct Mercury (again) 8/3, Pluto conjunct Sun (last pass) 8/17, Saturn square Venus 8/25, Uranus trine Pluto 9/9, Jupiter conjunct Jupiter 9/30, Jupiter square Mars 10/11, Saturn trine Mercury 10/13, Jupiter trine ascendant 10/13, Uranus trine Pluto (last pass) 10/24, Jupiter square Saturn 10/24, Jupiter square Uranus 10/24, Jupiter opposition Pluto 11/5, Pluto trine midheaven (last pass) 11/7, Jupiter conjunct Sun 11/18, Jupiter trine midheaven 11/27, Saturn trine Mercury (last pass) 12/6, Jupiter trine Moon 12/9, and Uranus sextile Sun 12/29. Looks like a great renewal of intellectual vitality to me, combined with drastic change, high visibility, and relatively little resistance. By the way, my earlier remark about Pluto and my book referred to my own Pluto/Sun conjunction, not the T.S.'s. The society has a lot more than one book happening in 94. Is there anyone out there interested in looking at various crises in Theosophical history in terms of the transits to the Society's chart? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 18:01:27 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: In my thoughts > > John Mead and All those who have read GASSHO > > What is the possibility that we can come up with a similar electronic > on-line system for theosophical teachings? John, are you planning to > send a copy of the postings to TSA headquarters ( perhaps in hard > copy format) so as to provide them some input for instituting > self-study courses, with help from an on-line teacher via this > network? John Algeo, the new head of TSA seems to be very much > oriented towards offering courses to all those interested and what > better system can we have that reaches all remote locations than > this network (I have even seen e-mail from India and Taiwan, not to > mention European countries and Australia etc.)? Is there an e-mail > address for anyone at TSA headquarters (or other similar esoteric > organizations)? John Algeo has been very supportive of the efforts to get Theosophy onto the Internet etc. We all seem to agree that this is the best media to handle the enlarging numbers of Members-at-large. It is the best way to unite them into a community that will be comfortable for them. I was never too much for local lodges myself. Too independent & too much a hermit to have to deal with people at set specific times of the day/week. On-line you can talk at 3am without waking them up :-) It is also really good to get cross communications going between the various societies too. A good example is how Bailey's books are often criticized until you get out into the less secluded world. Everyone I know (NON TS) has read Bailey but few have ever seriously considered Blavatsky as worth reading (I'm not sure why... different people just resonate to different cultural/language/communication paths. Bailey seems to really talk to ALOT of people TODAY much more so than Blavatsky. I like them both and find differences to be mostly one of interpretation rather real philosophical divergences). my 2 cents worth. We need to find three members at large to form a recognized TSA study group. When this happens, I am sure that TSA National will get an online account. I think I have talked the Fieldwork department into getting an account set up in any case. Of course these things move slowly... I have sent a sample Month's postings to National. They have also seen the TS Help/Introduction file (runs under windows with graphics etc) which Don created. I suggest you contact him (I think he is on Theos-Buds) to see what his latest project is. The glimpses/whispers have been exciting... When National gets an On-line account, we will definitely be trying to get a National Electronic Newsletter going along with other additions to our on-line libraries/archives. There MAY be some tender spots with Copyright, but they are usually reasonable. After all... we are all on the same team (we sometimes forget that though :-) Peace -- John Mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 19:58:31 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: Pluto on T.S. chart > > Looks like a great renewal of intellectual vitality to me, > combined with drastic change, high visibility, and relatively > little resistance. > > By the way, my earlier remark about Pluto and my book referred > to my own Pluto/Sun conjunction, not the T.S.'s. The society has a > lot more than one book happening in 94. Is there anyone out there > interested in looking at various crises in Theosophical history > in terms of the transits to the Society's chart? > yes --- I know several who would be interested. By the way... we have on-line archives and Libraries (FTP and Listserv accessible) if you want to place any studies you have done on the subject into the library/archive just send them to me and I'll add them. The stuff we put on-line is World accessible (Public Domain). Hence, please be aware that we give credit to the authors but that after someone gets a copy it is out of our hands (People tend to respect authorship on Internet but there is no Police force....). Also it might make for a good short essay in our Newsletter (Charlotte Study group's that is) if ok with you. Peace -- John Mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:02:13 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Comments on globes and planes To All. First let me say that it is good to hear from Don again. His recent message on theos-buds concerning the globes and planes is excellent. I couldn't say it any better. Don is one of the few people I know who can sit back and see the Big Picture. To Brenda. Yes, Brenda, Angels do exist. The problem is in determining exactly where they exist. Some say that they exist externally in the invisible worlds around us. Others say that they exist in our own minds (i.e. as psychic projections or archetypes). Most magicians and occultists take the practical position that we should act *as if* they exist externally to us and independent from us. Like the existence of God, you have to either have faith or not because it can't be proved in the laboratory one way or the other. I personally believe that the universe is filled with other living intelligent beings, call them Angels or whatever you want. In a higher sense, both views are correct because if you go far enough outwardly, you will find yourself inward, and vice versa, the two directions forming a circle. To Eldon. I agree with much of what you have written concerning the globes and planes. However, I would like you to explain your statement that "But the visits are generally one of a feeling of the influence of the globes, and not an actual physical presence on them." Also "It is the *higher globes* that are the places, the worlds, the earths that we will one day have embodied existence on, e.g. fully developed consciousness in and through a physical body." These two statements baffle me. Exactly how does one go about having a physical body on the astral (or mental) plane? Do you have sources for these statements? Are you saying that in the future Globe E, for example, will move down to the physical plane next to Globe D? I confess, I am confused. Also, to limit all visitations to the globes implies that you reject the Qabalistic doctrine of interconnecting pathways. While it is true that HBP said nothing about the pathways, nor did G de P, I would submit that they do, in fact, exist and can be visited as well - else one must leapfrog or jump from one globe to the next. Some general comments on the globes and planes. The cosmic planes can be thought of as conditions (I believe that this was G de P's view), or places (HPB, Leadbeater, and others certainly considered them to be places that could be visited as well as inhabited by a multitude of denizens). Both views work. The assumptions that go into an occult universe model are not terribly demanding nor are they necessarily numerous. Three are common to all models: that divinity exists, that divinity is self-creative and self-manifesting, and that our Earth located on the physical plane is a lower expression from this divinity with various other worlds in between. The primary differences in the models come about in their definitions of these in-between worlds. There is a Qabalistic model, a theosophical model, several Hindu models, several Buddhist models, an ancient Egyptian model and a Gnostic model, (and nowdays an Enochian Model) to name only the best known. Why so many models? Because there is no one model that will appeal or be suitable to everyone. We experience (and recall/interpret afterwards) the planes and globes according to our cultural inheritance or worldview. So virtually every culture will have its own model. So when we hear someone talk very authoritatively about a globe or sephiroth or invisible world, we must always remember that they are speaking from the perspective of a particular model. We can, and we do (whether we remember it or not), visit these invisible realms. Those who say otherwise are simply mistaken (MHO). There are countless recorded cases throughout the occult literature of every culture. Shananism, nowdays a very popular topic, involves visits to the astral and sometimes the mental planes (but I have not yet seen indications of anything beyond these two). Visiting these worlds is probably the main theme and practice in every school of magic throughout both east and west (nowdays it is usually called pathworking). HPB (at the end of Isis) even goes so far as to give us the key occult principles involved in such operations. A very big problem about such visitations lies in what has been called confounding the planes. Unless you are skilled or have a great deal of knowledge about such things, you are very apt to mix up where you are and what is really going on. In my magic books, I stress the need for signposts (i.e., places or moods or beings that should be common to all travelers) to keep straying to a minimum. Such signposts are well known in the Qabala, where seers have recorded their experiences for many years. Unfortunately, the Gupta Vidya Model is not as well known and few signposts exist. I am currently trying to correct this problem. I would locate Kamaloka along the connecting path between Globes C and E, and Devachan is on the path between Globes B and F. The famous Akashic Records are on Globe G (which is in agreement with hints given by Leadbeater). Our Reincarnating Ego along with the Silent Watcher are on the path between Globes A and G (as hinted by HPB), and so on. Of course, such things as localizations have to be taken with some warnings and some caveates. G de P says that Devachan, for example, could be located virtually anywhere - but obviously it must be somewhere on the mental plane. Nevertheless, if the GV Model is to ever become popular and certainly if it is ever to compete with the Qabala, then such defining and limiting is necessary (this is exactly the function of a model, after all. I would suggest that this is the main reason that HPB and G de P were reluctant to go any farther in their definitions of the GV Model). Although most theosophists seem not to care a wit, or perhaps they desire to retain secrecy, I like the GV Model better than the Qabalistic Tree and feel that these former secrets need to be given out publically. It is my intention to do so. As I was saying, without signposts one tends to confound the planes. This probably is what happened with early theosophists who visited Globes C and D and thought that they were visting the planets Mars and Mercury. Swedenborg fell victim to this as well. Without signposts, you can be mislead into a false interpretation of your experience. Technically it is true that planes cannot be visited, but rather only the globes and paths. When you have a dream, you are in your astral (or mental) body, but it clearly *feels* like a physical body during the dream. It is only after you wake up that you realize you were visiting the astral (or mental) plane. And then you will interpret your experience in terms of your worldview. If your worldview is materialistic and doesn't allow for a subtle plane, then you will assure yourself that it was *only* a dream probably induced by something you ate, and you will go on with your life. What is a dream if not a visit to one of the invisible globes of our planetary chain? Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:04:10 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Comments on globes and planes Don, thanks for your excellent answers to Arvind's questions on the globes and planes. I agree with you completely. Technically, the globes are located on the planes in the same way that our Globe D (which is our planet Earth) is located on the physical plane. Earth is on the physical plane. Globes C and E are located on the astral plane in the same way. So for the others. Everyone has a component of themselves located somewhere on each plane. Just as we have a physical body on the physical plane, so we have an astral body on the astral plane with astral senses, and a mental body on the mental plane complete with mental senses, and so on for each plane. But for most folks, we are only conscious of the physical. We act in our astral, mental, and causal bodies every day, but are largely unaware of it. Where do we go when we go to sleep but to the higher globes of our planetary chain? To visit one of the higher globes, we shift our consciousness so that it focuses in one of our subtle bodies. Meditation is one technique used for this. There are many techniques. If you could shift your consciousness to your mental body, for example, you would see yourself in your mental body (which would *feel* like a physical body to you at the time) and you would perceive things on the psychic plane through your psychic/mental senses. This whole business can be seen as simple or made very complicated depending on how you want to look at it. You don't need to know how a combustion engine works to drive a car, and you don't need to know how the globes and planes work to visit them. But, I suppose that some knowledge helps. If nothing else, knowledge will give you a mental framework with which to interpret your experiences in a meaningful way. I have never heard the Monad equated with the Dhyan Chohan before. The Dhyan Chohans are beings who reside in the higher globes of our planetary chain (most can be found on Globe F') and who help us in certain ways in our evolutionary development. Most magical and occult schools equate the Monad with the inner god (or goddess, if you prefer), the inner divinity that resides within us all. We are destined to meet with, and to converse with, this being some day. Eventually we will assume its identity and become it - ie., we will realize that it is our Self. The questions "Who am I" and "What am I" are excellent questions to focus on during meditation. Ramana Maharishi, a famous Bengali saint at the end of the last century, taught and used this technique (his physical body was reported by eyewitnesses to shine with radiated light). The point of it all is: wherever your identity is, that is where you are. By shifting your sense of identity to a deity (this is an old magical technique called the assumption of a god-form which is still used today in Tibetan Buddhism and endorsed by the Dali Lama) you can raise your consciousness into the higher globes of our planetary chain. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:39:40 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Pluto on T.S. chart I have an article about HPB's chart and the Society's on a diskette somewhere. But will have to learn how to ASCI save it and then read it as an email file. May take a while. Both HPB, HSO and the TS are characterized by fixed signs and hard aspects. I have a Scorpio stellium including the Sun, a Taurus Moon and Leo rising-- guess that has something to do with attraction to Theosophy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 20:52:31 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Comments on globes and planes You might be interested in a new book by Dan Merkur in the SUNY series on Western Esoteric Traditions. It's entitled Gnosis, and the subtitle is something like-- a tradition of mystical visions and unitive experiences. The author provides a very accessible but scholarly historical survey of traditions which combine mystical experiences with "maps" for journeys through higher planes. He's especially good on the Isma`ili sevenfold path of ascent, which is particularly resonant with Blavatskian Theosophy. But there's lots of Kabbalah and Sufism too. PS-- Hi Jerry, como esta? Llewellyn was, surprisingly, quite interested in my ms. but SUNY got there first. Have you any new projects in the works? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 21:27:23 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: To John mostly replies to Don (long over due.... sorry) > > the sense that the mathematics of the theory separates out the > exact requirements (logically speaking) for a system to obtain > the status of Measure vs truly empty (insignificant is a better > word) of physical properties such as a definable Length.> > > Could you elaborate on this? The basic problem arises when you try to define concepts that have a physical interpretation such as measure (length, volume, mass, observable quantities that combine and separate and combine and separate with some notion as to a conservation of whatever the measured quantied is...) the idea is that mathematically a pea, basketball, and planet all have the same number of "points" within them. Hence, one can cut up a Pea into a *finite* number of subsets and then reassemble them into an object the size of the World. This can be done because the abstract concept of point is dimensionless. What one wants to do in measure theory is to define or specify the rules which give things an objective quality. The best example is Volume of a pea should be preserved if you disassemble it and reassemble it mathematically. (if you want it to have a physical presence as we know it on the physical plane.) hence you want to specify what limits (mathematical requirements) must be present to dissamble something and then recombine it without messing up its physical properties like size. so for lengths (of a line say) you want subsets that behave as: (I = a fixed INterval, and Sn some subsets (index on n) of its points) L(I) = L(USn) = Sum L(Sn) (L is a function which assigns a subset of I a Length or some physical preserved property. you want the length of the union to always equal the sum of the individual lengths. In Normal Reiman Integration one always works with subintervals and there is usually no problem. However, if you allow one to break the segment into things like Rationals and Irrationals then it gets to be a problem to assign the length of the Rationals to a Number and the length of the irrationals to another number. When do Gaps become important esp regarding cardinality and how do you gaurantee the size conservation??? Measure theory gives the rules for what types of sets and set algebras can be successfully constructed to gaurantee a meaningful concept of physical measure. One realyy nifty thing is that (Proven not too long ago I think) is that to build the structures which defy a physical reality requires using the axiom of Choice. If you do not allow Consciousness to build an arbitrary structure, and limit yourself to "Normal" operations which do not require a free will, you will never have a problem with things becoming "Unphysical". This strikes me as VERY interesting. It is also interesting that you cannot do QM without Hilbert Spaces (which are *neccessarily* intertwined with restrictions regarding Lebesgue measurable Spaces ..... i.e. mathematical reality without consciousness). Once you introduce free will (Axiom of choice) you can jump out of the Physical realm easily... indeed it is *neccessary* if you want to leave the physical plane (mathematically)! > <... describing the difference between the physical plane and the > lesser planes> > Could you elaborate on this some more too? Its my impression that > the physical plane is a *subset* of the mental plane ... yes... lesser was a bad (i.e. unconventional choice/use of the term/word). I meant lesser as less *physical* not a smaller space (it IS larger in the mental frame.... more freedom and structures can be created). > many of the truly QM events that exist. > > Regarding the nondeterminism that *seems* to be present in QM, I > still am hesitant to buy into the idea that nondeterminism is a > cornerstone concept. May A quick example is that Planetary Motion exhibits Chaotic effects, mostly observed when predicting orbits over very long time frames (the initial conditions of the equations need accuracy to an infinite precision). Hence the Chaos of planetary motion makes the movements chaotic. HOWEVER... the integrals of the motions will always behave classically (i.e. total energy is conserved etc.) HENCE... things that are TRULY QM will NEVER be explained through Chaos theory applied to classical (non QM) mechanics. The QM effects occur (momentary violation of conservation of energy, allowing energy tunneling and other effects) only can occur by using QM. Virtual particles are required to explain reality, and no chaos theory will create them out of a framework that is inherently classical. (i.e. deterministic in the various integrals of motion, conservation laws etc.). more later... Peace --- John Mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 21:58:03 -0500 From: BALAM@delphi.com Subject: About Balam To Brenda The Balaam you speak of is not the Balam which I use as a code name. Actually this code was picked by Ed who signed on to the network for me. This Balam means Jaguar. It was the name given to the first four created men of the Quiche Maya of Guatemala and southern Mexico. To this day the Maya and foreigners who live in the area use this name to denote aristocra- cy. Both the Jaguar and the Quetzal (bird) were creatures venerated by the ancient Maya. The Popol Vuh and the Chilan Balam are mentioned somewhere in the Secret Doctrine, but I am un- able to refer you to the pages. I am assuming that you have heard of these sacred books of the ancient Quiche. Another Balaam spelled like yours is mentioned on page 409 of vol. 2 of the S.D.........................Sarah. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 22:25:09 -0500 From: "Michael W. Grenier" Subject: Internet Access I'm playing with a crazy idea and was wondering how many of us using THEOS-L are directly on the internet? (vs. remote logging into a host that is on the internet) In particular, can any of you use gopher or WWW? If you can, could you send me some personal mail (I don't want to disturb these more valuable conversations) -Mike Grenier mike@atc.sp.parmax.com Michael W. Grenier mike@atc.sp.paramax.com 612-456-7869 Unisys Govt. Systems From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 23:13:59 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: Internet Access Hi -- I have an account on vnet with unix os command access. I can get to Gopher, Archie, WWW etc. John Mead p.s. sorry the T-shirt was late. I got swamped and just sent it yesterday. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 01:41:23 -0500 From: Donald DeGracia <72662.1335@compuserve.com> Subject: To Jerry from Don Jerry: Nice to hear from you. Hope you have nice holidays and all! A few relatively quick comments on your post: First, thanks for the quick refresher on Globes/planes. It rang bells. Second: I understand what you were saying here, that people are usually not conscious on the astral, mental and buddhic. You are right, we do not sense these planes in the same fashion that we sense the physical plane. However, I would suggest that the vast majority of our waking expereince is the result of our activity on the nonphysical planes. Thus, when we feel emotion, we are actually expereincing the action of our astral body as it *projects* through our physical body, and likewise, when we think, we are expereincing the action of the mental body as it projects through our physical body, and also, when we *act* we are expereincing the action of our buddhic body as it projects through our physical body. Thus, in these terms, our nonphysical bodies play a major role in our so-called normal expereince. The vast bulk of our day to day subjective reality consits of feeling emotions, thinking and acting. These behaviors are not intrinsic to our physical body, but are effects created in the physical body by our nonphysical bodies. So, in short, the average person is probably much more conscius of the astral and mental (and to a lesser degree, the buddhic) planes than they are even the physical plane itself, seeing as how people are so self-absorbed. Of course, the altered states you spoke of, that allow us to percieve the astral, mental, ect planes, *on their own terms* and not couched in physical clothing is just as valid a viewpoint, and of course, gives one a much more pristine look at the nature of these planes unfettered by physicality. I agree with this thinking very much. I would only add that you can identify with any you want, yet still maintain your unique indivduality. Psyches can merge yet still remain the distinct (again, a phenomena that has no real counterpart in our expereince). Well, nuff for now. Best to you! Don From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 06:37:52 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Saviors, planes, globes, and the seven keys. Arvind/Eldon/Brenda et al of the AAB/HPB discussion: I will have to keep my comments as short as possible because I'm in the middle of a twenty page paper I have to turn in. Let me begin with Arvind's quote from the S.D. concerning Maitreya Buddha (Vol. I, p. 470), where Arvind partially Quotes: "Only it is not in the Kali Yug, our present terrifically materialistic age of Darkness, the "Black Age" that a new Savior of Humanity can ever appear." Arvind finds an apparent contradiction because of a statement by AAB that the Christ will appear by the year 2025. Now Arvind, I'm really sorry that you found this one just as I'm in the middle of a paper, because off hand I can't think of another section in THE SECRET DOCTRINE that would require more elucidation. We are dealing with a rather sophisticated concept here, requiring more explanation then I can give right now, but lets start with this: First of all, go back to page 470 and look at your quote in context to the entire paragraph. You will find that she is drawing together the different appellations of the savior figures in Eastern philosophy. The word "Christ" is never used. She begins by identifying Avalokiteshwara with Kwan-shi-yin, and in the second paragraph tells us that they are both forms of the seventh universal principle. He second sentence beginning "The Secret Doctrine teaches that..." indicates that her following statement is from the Esoteric teachings. She quotes: `He who is first to appear at Renovation will be the last to come before Re- absorption (pralaya).' From here she begins an interpretation of this statement: "Thus the Logoi of all nations...." Then continues by making a global mention of savior figures: "from the Vedic Visvakarma of the Mysteries down to the Savior of the present civilized nations...." Visvakarma is the prototype of the savior mythology, originally based upon the initiation cycle. H.P.B. discusses this figure in some detail in "The Initiation of the Sun King," in volume fourteen of her collected works. The "Savior of the present civilized nations" is of course an oblique reference to the latest manifestation of the Vivakarma prototype, in mythology, i.e. the Biblical Jesus. You must be very careful here about context. In Isis Unveiled, H.P.B. discusses Jesus in great detail under three aspects: 1 the Historical Jesus, 2 The Biblical Jesus, 3 The Theological Jesus. There is a forth aspect, which people too often confuse with the other three: the Christ, or the seventh Universal Principle. H.P.B. is very consistent through out all of her works on this account, and it is very important to keep in mind which one she is talking about. In this case, in context with Viviskarma, Avalokiteshwara, Kwan- shi-yin, The great Dragon of Wisdom and Maitreya Buddha, and the Savior of the present civilized nations are all names from different mythological and religious systems referring to the "seventh Universal Principle," as being equivalent to the Christ. But mind you, this is not a person, but a *principle*. In the second paragraph, H.P.B. defines this principle as "the synthetic aggregation of all the planetary Spirits, Dhyani Chohans." Thus we are not speaking of an individual here, but rather an *abstract principle* that has been *personified* into numerous mythological characters that we call "saviors." It is referred to as a deity, in the same since that the Elohim (the formative regents of this solar system) is called a deity, though it is a plural term. In other words, to refer to the seventh universal principle as an entity, can only be done in the same way that we might refer to the "army" or the "marines" as an entity. Now this brings us down to the section that you quoted (if you are still with me): "Only it is not in the Kali Yug, our present terrifically materialistic age of Darkness, the "Black Age" that a new Savior of Humanity can ever appear." As we have seen above, the "*new* Savior of Humanity" is a manifestation on earth of this universal Seventh Principle. H.P.B. doesn't go into how this comes about here (we'll do that some other time, after the semester is over), but since we are talking about a collective, it is obvious that this is not a simple case of some deity that "reincarnates." Let us just say that a metaphorical ray is sent. Read "The Incarnation of the Sun Initiate" for more information. H.P.B. says that this Maitreya Buddha will appear in the seventh race. The seventh race is also our last stage of evolution this marks our final stage of evolution before going into obscuration until we are ready to begin our fifth round evolution. Therefore, I would be very careful about this one. Rather than some "savior," she could just as well be alluding to a general spiritual influence. Now this brings us to your question: Does the above statement mean that HPB did not consider the Christ when he overshadowed Jesus 2000 years age (during kali Yug) a `savior of Humanity'? H.P.B.'s allusion to Jesus in the full paragraph was worded as the "Savior of the present civilized civilizations." Since all of the other characters she was talking about are mythological, why would this allusion be to a historical Jesus? Notice that she never used the name "Jesus" or "The Christ" which would have created confusion, leading people to think that she was referring to a historical figure, because she was aware that her reading audience was in the habit of thinking that way. The reason she alluded to the "Savior of the present civilized civilizations" is because the Biblical Jesus (not the theological), is an avatara figure, borrowed from Egyptian and Hindu mythology. For a detailed discussion of this, I refer you to ISIS UNVEILED and "The Esoteric Character of the Gospels" where she discusses this in some depth. But you must keep in mind that this Jesus is *not* a historical, but a *mythological* figure. For Eldon's benefit, I must here acknowledge that G. de Purucker (1875-1942) teaches that Jesus was both an Avatara and a historical figure. I have for years put out the challenge to students of Purucker to produce a single passage in H.P.B.'s writings were she refers to a *historical* Avataric Jesus. A lot of people got mad at me, but as yet, no one has produced the reference. In fact, I even got an admission out of the Current editor of Blavatsky's collected works, that such a reference is not to be found. I am not saying that Purucker was wrong, I am only saying that the concept of a historical Avataric Jesus is not among H.P.B.'s teachings. However, Purucker has a rather special definition of "avatar," but this is off the subject. Perhaps Eldon will want to do an essay on this sometime. For the historical Jesus, there are references scattered all through H.P.B.'s writings. She draws from Jewish documents that Jesus was a Syrian sage (sometimes she calls him an "adept," which is not the same as "avatar") who was born in Syria about 100 B.C. under the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 B.C.). The title "adept" implies that Jesus was initiated--and H.P.B. does refer to him as an "initiate." But an "initiate" is not the same concept as "Avatara." The Jesus in this context, was a messenger who went among the masses knowing the dangers of doing so. But there is no association between this historical Jesus and the Maitreya. For this we have to go to Leadbeater's MASTERS AND THE PATH. Here Leadbeater introduces a concept of the Maitreya as a spiritual being who incarnates as different people. He incarnated as the Buddha, as Jesus, and finally as Krishnamurti. But as I say, this is completely Leadbeater's teaching. I have found no collaboration for it in Blavatsky's writings. In fact, as I hope you see from the above, her teachings starkly contradict him. In answer to the last part of your question concerning spiritual cycles. H.P.B. talks about a 2000 year "messianic" cycle. The Historical Jesus may have filled this role, but that makes him no different from what H.P.B. describes him to be. Purucker states, for whatever it is worth, that H.P.B. was the messenger for this messianic cycle, and that the modern Theosophical Movement begun by Blavatsky is to last for 2000 years. That means the Jesus and Blavatsky were both messengers of the messianic cycle, which H.P.B. calculates to have culminated in 1899. There is also supposed to be an effort made at the last quarter of every century to "enlighten the barbarians" (that's us). This decree was made by Tsong-Ka-Pa in the thirteenth century. Some say that H.P.B. also was a representative of that effort. Concerning the "keys" that Eldon came up with: Thank you for the effort, but I had already researched this out quite thoroughly some years ago. As Eldon pointed out, H.P.B. does not give the order of the keys, with the exception of the "mystical" (Theogonic) and the "Geometrical." The Numerical, according to H.P.B. is the fourth key. But with a little common sense, I think one can get the order down pretty close. Eldon is correct is surmising that some terms refer to the same key. A close reading in context would have made this self evident. I think it is also important to note, in case there is any misunderstanding, what H.P.B. means by "key." A key is a system, or a pattern of signifiers, (like a language), by which the meaning of esoteric texts can be decoded. An esoteric text may have several keys, but not necessarily all seven. Nor is every part of every text applicable to be decoded by every key, though the symbols and allegories will all have seven keys. I have taught this subject for several years. One of the activities we have in our study group here is that we read and interpret esoteric texts using the keys. We don't have time to decode the texts using all of the keys, but I teach them to a least recognize when to use which key. They are getting very good at it. Below are the seven keys in their approximately correct order, with some page references so that you can look them up for yourself. There are a lot more references than I gave, but no time to dig them out right now: 1. Theogonic (or mystical) This key concerns the birth of the gods. Hesiod's Theogony is a theogonic text, and is intended to be interpreted primarily in this way. II: 291 2. Anthropological Concerns the birth and evolution of the Human kingdom. I: 109 3. Astro-Chemical This key is primarily used in the interpretation of Alchemical texts. I: 109 4. Numerical This is the key revealed through Skinner's THE SOURCE OF MEASURES. It has to do with numerical correlations to ancient alphabets. It also has to do with key numbers for calculating cycles etc. that have been with held. I: 164 5. Geometric Symbols of nature and shapes such as the Platonic solids have special meaning. This is one of the keys to Biblical interpretation. Gordon Plummer's THE MATHEMATICS OF THE COSMIC MIND explicates on this subject. II: 471 6. Astronomical Special symbolical system, fragments of which are still to be found in astrology. Tilik's ORION, THE ARTIC HOME OF THE VEDAS is an interpretation of the Vedas, using the astronomical key. 7. Physical Physical nature. The one key available to science. I: 155 fn. As for others "keys" that Eldon mentioned: Law of analogy is not a key, but a general principle of occult investigation. Symbolism is not a key, but rather what all of these keys have in common. "anthroposophy" is not a key, but rather the name of Rudolf Steiner's school of thought. Perhaps, Eldon meant to write "anthropology," but he didn't give any page references, so I can't follow his trail. I never heard of "metrological." Perhaps Eldon can clarify. Atma-Vidya means Divine Wisdom, and is not a key, but rather another term for Theosophy. Regarding Brenda's quote II: 22 fn. H.P.B. is not talking about keys here, but "aspects" of the keys. In other words, a key may not be correctly used from a psychological or astronomical aspect, but if you look at it from its physical or metaphysical aspect, you may get the correct meaning. Therefore she is not naming a "psychological key" here, but rather discussing ways of correctly using a given key. Concerning Arvind's question: "Are Globes and Planes the same thing?" It appears that you have a lot of answers already, but here is mine: A plane is defined in the Glossary in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY as "the range or extent of some state of consciousness, or the state of matter corresponding to the perceptive powers of a particular set of senses." As for "globe," you are sitting on one. We call it "earth," but in theosophical jargon, it is called the "fourth globe of the earth planetary chain." There are six more globes in the earth chain, but they are invisible. Your naming of the Kosmic planes are correct for Leadbeater's nomenclature, but incorrect for Blavatsky. From lowest to highest they are: 1. 1st Kosmic Plane (Prakritic) 2. 2nd Kosmic Plane 3. 3rd Kosmic Plane (Jiva-Fohat) 4. 4th Kosmic Plane 5. 5th Kosmic Plane 6. 6th Kosmic Plane 7. 7th Kosmic Plane The seven Solar Planes from lowest to highest are called 1. Prakritic 2. Astral 3. Jivic 4. Fohatic 5. Mahatic 6. Alayic 7. Auric While we are at it, H.P.B.'s nomenclature of the seven principles are also different from Leadbeater's. Her standard (there are others but this one is applicable to THE SECRET DOCTRINE) nomenclature from lowest to highest is: 1. Stula Sarira 2. Linga Sarira 3. Prana 4. Kama 5. Manas 6. Buddhi 7. Atma You ask: "Do we exist simultaneously an all the planes of the solar system simultaneously in the sense that there are counterparts to our consciousness on other planes even though we are normally not aware of them when functioning on the first plane..." Our auric envelope extends to the boundaries of our solar system. "Partak[ing]" of the "goings-on" of the solar planes beyond the third (if I recall) is beyond the Dhyani Chohan's abilities, so I would not have much hope for us. I'll pass on your fourth and fifth questions for now, because it would require several pages of definitions concerning "soul," "ego," "monad," "Higher Self," etc. before we could even begin to discuss these subjects. Another time. Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 10:32:25 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: stray comments This must be a record day for new email on the discussion groups. There was about 17 pages of material waiting to be read this morning! ---- John Mead: When you mention that you are still looking for three members-at-large of the Adyar T.S. to form a Study Center, I'm not clean on what you intend to do at that point. Will there be a new list dedicated to that group's own discussions, perhaps 'theos-sc', or do you plan to place some restrictions or controls over the discussions on the existing lists? I'm not clear on the copyright issues. The current copyright law protects materials, even when they do not bear notice of copyright. You can even publish a book and leave off the copyright notice, and it is still protected. Private email is protected. I'm not sure about mail sent to internet groups, that get posted onto perhaps millions of computers worldwide. Without going back and rereading all the materials at home that I have from the copyright office, I'd say, off hand, that postings to our mailing lists, and putting articles at a 'ftp' site do not constitute placing the materials in the public domain. I don't think that either meets the definition of 'publication', and that even if something were considered published, since it does not need to bear the copyright notice, the material would still be protected. Sometime if I have the time I'll post the general rules. Jerry S.: I have a number of ideas that I'd like to bring up and review with you regarding the the globes and planes, but too little time this morning. One comment for now regarding pathways between various globes, different that an serial progression (e.g. A to B to C ...). I'll just draw an analogy for now. If you go from Buddhi to Kama, did you pass through Manas on the way, or is there a direct link? As major principles, you pass through them, one to the next. But there is a quality of each in the other, so there is Buddhi-Kama and Kama-Buddhi as subprinciples, in which the qualities are unified. Is this unified nature of the qualities a bridge, or if not, what would we consider it? Jerry H-E: I agree that there in addition to the differences that we may find between Leadbeater and Blavatsky, there may be others between de Purucker and Blavatsky. How we explain and interpret the differences is based upon our individual understandings (and definitions) of Theosophy. I'll try to find passages where there is mention of laws or keys of analogy, symbolism, anthroposophy, metrology, and Atma-Vidya in the S.D. My "research" consisted of about five minutes of searching, in WordPerfect, through the S.D., and quickly writing down what appeared to be the names of keys. When I go back to the quotes, we can see if they offer us any useful information. Even if there is not universal agreement with what you write, it is appreciated, and useful for the group. Your work to pull out relevant materials of Blavatsky's helps keep the group grounded, pulling it back from the three dangers of (1) uncontrolled philosophical speculation, of (2) accepting any and every possible writer and authority on an equal basis, and of (3) substituting psychical experience for reasoned thought as a basis for understanding the truths of life. Paul Jonhson: Welcome to the group. It's good to see another person with a long background in study of Theosophy join us. As an astrological note, I'd say that it was the Uranus-Neptune conjunction in September and October, exactly square my natal Neptune, that got me really started in writing on this group. I feel that I'm close to other things as well, but will have to wait and see how they unfold. ---- Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 11:53:52 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: transits to TS chart Have looked at a few major events for transit correspondences. The day AB announced most of the 12 apostles probably goes down as the nuttiest in TS history, but no major outer planet action was apparent. The Sun was opposing the TS Mars, and conjunct its Uranus. The Moon was opposing Jupiter, and Mars was squaring the Sun. No pay dirt with the Leadbeater "trial" before TS Council in May 1906. As noted by Osmar, K's dissolution of the OSE was simultaneous with Pluto's passage over the TS ascendant. This would seem to indicate the emergence into consciousness of powerful transforming energies which had formerly been acting subconsciously. After all, K had been edging away for years but it didn't really "hit the fan" until August 1929. Another biggie I found was the Hodgson Report. Using January 1, 1886, since HPB received a copy the night before, I find Neptune and Pluto conjoined in opposition to the TS Sun. I'd suggest that this indicates some heavy karma associated with "phenomena." Any requests? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 12:29:51 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Omens in the Heavens The Fires of Jubilee by Stephen Oates has the following paras of interest to Theosophical history buffs. He's explaining that Nat Turner's slave rebellion had originally been planned for July 4, 1831, but he decided to wait for an omen before launching what would be the most violent slave uprising in American history: On Saturday, August 13, 1831, there was another sign. Because of some atmospheric disturbance, the sun grew so dim it could be looked at directly. Then with the air "a dead calm" the sun seemed to change colors--now pale green, now blue, now white--and there was much excitement and consternation in the eastern U.S. from S.C. to N.Y. In Philadelphia, fearful whites proclaimed it a "sad augury of coming evil." In Richmond, newspapers contended that the sun's sinister appearance could be explained scientifically. But others there, adhering to predictions of the ancient astrologers, thought a bloody war was at hand and prophesied the end of the world. By Saturday afternoon, the sun was like an immense ball of polished silver, and the air was moist and hazy. Then a black spot could be seen, apparently on the sun's surface--a phenomenon that greatly aroused the slaves in southeastern Virginia. For Nat Turner, watching transfixed on the Travis farm, the spot was like a black hand across the sun. Yes it was Jehovah again, commanding him by "signed omens" to rise against his white enemies. Yes, God wanted him to move. This was the day after HPB's birth, but given the 8-hour time difference between Va. and Russia it was still her birthday when these phenomena began. While Nat's violent interpretation of the omen, and his action based on that, are regrettable, it does not seem entirely alien to HPB's lifework that phenomena associated with her birth inspired the largest slave uprising in history. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 13:39:14 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: stray comments > John Mead: > > When you mention that you are still looking for three members-at-large > of the Adyar T.S. to form a Study Center, I'm not clear on what you > intend to do at that point. Will there be a new list dedicated to that > group's own discussions, perhaps 'theos-sc', or do you plan to place > some restrictions or controls over the discussions on the existing > lists? The basic reason I want to do this is no secret and no planned agenda... It is simply to create a piece of paper to file with Wheaton so that they have a definite item/reason they can "point to/at" to get an on-line account or other hookup with Internet. I have found that to get formal movement from them you need to feed them paper. It is that simple. I do not think any separate forum/list would be needed. Undoubtedly someone will create a reason to have a separate closed discussion list, but personal e-mail seems more appropriate to me... I do not like controlled anythings.. but some people need different spaces where they feel more comfortable. Personally, I think they (Wheaton) need access to distribute info. out to the Theos-News list, Communicate more with local people, and also to communicate with the other societies... it is a win-win situation. also I look forward to watching what will ultimately happen.. sometimes it is better entertainment than TV :-) > > I'm not clear on the copyright issues. The current copyright law > ... It really should not be a problem. I have just seen (first hand) some organizations (and individuals) get very attached to their documents. A classic case recently is that there is a TOTAL ban on any quotes from the URANTIA book in the Compuserve NewAge forum. The Urantia Foundation is sueing people left and right and everyone is scared to allow any of their material onto the Public boards. It makes no sense legally (or emotionally). It is just fact. The course of Miracles people have also copyrighted their stuff and have made some legal motions too. They claim Christ (or rather the source for the channellings) told them to copyright and protect the works. I am not too sure of the details though. I am only relaying this on from postings in the public files on Compuserve. Did I tell you the story about Jesse Helms visiting a Babtist Church here locally, and how the members were having him Autograph their family Bibles??? Jesse was autographing them just like he wrote the book or something ... that is just an example of how people and documents develop some strange ties. :-) Peace -- John Mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 14:04:46 -0500 From: eldon@raider.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM Subject: roadblocks to further progress The study of the Esoteric Philosophy is one where the only roadblock to further progress is ourselves, is our unwillingness to move on, to progress beyond the limits that we set for ourselves. Until and unless we admit that there are deeper levels to an understanding of the theosophical doctrines, including the very core concepts themselves, we create a barrier that will eventually lead us to crystalize in our thinking and lead to the loss of the inspiriation of the spiritual intuition and inner teacher. We have to loosen our grip on the ideas that we have been taught, to hold our ideas lightly and respectfully, rather than tightly grasp them, and hold onto them in a deadly embrace. As soon as an idea becomes too nicely established, too easy to repeat to others and verbalize, too quickly clothed in the same words every time that we approach it, it is dead, if not dying. There needs to be a sense of mystery behind the ideas, a sense of wonder and exploration, a sense that there are countless vistas to behold. A great, living truth, will tell us something new everytime that we visit it. It will be a constant source of inspiration and a friend to us in its own right. Our study of the theosophical books, or any that we find that are helpful to our personal cultivation of the spiritual life, can only take us so far. There is only so far that we can go in our thinking about what we are told, about trying to absorb the ideas we find directly stated in the words that we read. The reading and intellectual study is important, and without it we can not make any progress at all. But it is only the first step, and we need to invoke wisdom from within. And this wisdom does not contradict what we've read, but if it is true wisdom, it springs from the same source as the theosophical writings themselves, and it both further explains what we try to read and it tells us more as well. Don't put down the books. They will also play an important role in our spiritual lives. Until and unless we have personal Teachers, we need the books as another avenue of approach to them. But the books are only the beginning. We need to *believe* then to live the Teachings. And living them is based upon making the spiritual a living part of our lives, and not the chasing after phenomena nor powers. We have been given keys to unlocking some of the mysteries of the holy life, not of the lower, of the occult arts, but rather the spiritual path, and we need to take those keys and open the doors before us and transform both ourselves and the world about us! There are incredible beauties and wonders that await us. These are not beauties of the eye, beauties of the senses, but rather come out of the heart, of the inner nature of life itself, in its inner most chambers. There are wonders that cannot be put into words that await us, if only we'd seize them, and make them transformative powers in the world. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 21:11:45 -0500 From: OSMAR DE CARVALHO Subject: T.S. chart > Is there anyone out there > interested in looking at various crises in Theosophical history > in terms of the transits to the Society's chart? Twenty three degrees down equator there some theosophists who will love it!! Please. Osmar .. Amicum perdere est damnorum maximum. (GLASHorao-1/8) ___ GLASHwave/QWK v2.12 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1993 03:36:54 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: keys etc. Paul Johnson Thanks for the Nat Turner story, we all enjoyed it here. There is another story of an Indian sage who prophesied H.P.B.'s birth. I'll post it next time I run across it. Also enjoyed your astrological search. I would be interested to know if anything shows up on the September birth date, which H.P.B. calls the esoteric birth chart. Eldon Tucker I think that the main issue concerning the difference between Purucker and Blavatsky on the Historical Jesus rests upon Purucker's unique, yet carefully delineated definition of Avatara. Under his definition, Blavatsky and Purucker himself were avataras "of a sort," he would say. You say: "How we explain and interpret the differences is based upon our individual understands (and definitions) of Theosophy." Isn't this true of everything in life? More to the point, H.P.B. defined terms as she used them. We can interpret a text based upon her definitions, or make up our own. My concern is exactly as you expressed in "the three dangers." Therefore, if someone wants to interpret Blavatsky's (or anyone else's) writings from there own definitions, I think it is only fair for the rest of us that they qualify this fact. Otherwise they are mis-representing the writer--and that isn't fair to those who are using this net as a learning tool. If I misrepresent a writer, I hope to be called upon it, because, I believe that we have an obligation to communicate to others as accurately and as truthfully as we can. There is nothing secret or mystical about the seven keys. They are relatively easy to find in the SD, and clearly labeled. You were working at a disadvantage by taking five minutes to do a global search, because you did not have the time to read your passages in context. Meaning of a passage often changes radically when written in context. I have known lots of students who have looked up and listed the seven keys. Their lists match mine, except with possible disagreements in the order. My guess is that because Blavatsky never published a full list in one place, and Besant/Leadbeater never published a list, people who never read the SD assume that the seven keys were with held. A careful reading of the SD will show that this isn't true. Osmar Yes. I'm interested in looking at T.S. history in terms of transits. What do you want to do? Dan Caldwell We will be in Tucson between xmas and new years. Can we meet? Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:06:10 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: new files in archives/library The following are new additions to the Theos-L Archives: 1. dondeg01.txt - This is a text file that discusses hallucinogenic drugs from both a scientific and occult perspective. By Don DeGracia 2. dondeg02.txt - This is a text file that discusses the practical side of developing psychic abilities. By Don DeGracia 3. trdeye.txt - This is a text file about the biological function of the 3rd eye. By Richard Alan Miller. You may obtain copies of these files by sending to listserv@char.vnet.net e-mail containing the following lines INDEX THEOS-L GET THEOS-L dondeg01.txt the first line directs the listserver to send you a current listing of the files in the Theos-L Archive. The second line will direct the listserver to send you a copy of the file dondeg01.txt (the file name is usually case sensitive). The files are also available by anonymous FTP to vnet.net in the directory /pub/theos-l If you have difficulties feel free to ask for help Peace -- John Mead jem@vnet.net From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:29:46 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: To Don Don. Thanks for your thoughts. You are exactly right - most of us do act and react on the other planes without even being aware of it. We do have "effects created in the physical body by our nonphysical bodies." Yes. In fact, it was this idea that caused me to put in my 2 cents worth on the globes and planes in the first place. Several members of the study group were talking as if the globes and planes were something far away and reserved for when we become Adepts or something. Nothing is farther from the truth. We are already in our subtle bodies, right now. It is awareness that shifts or acts - not our bodies. I agree with you that the subtle bodies don't feel exactly like our physical body. Yes, you are quite right; I should not have used the word *physical* in that sentence. When you dream, you seem to have a body, or perhaps I should say body-consciousness. But, of course, you don't itch or feel pain (usually) like you do sometimes in the physical. You have a good point there. I agree, you can identify with a higher sense of identity or shift your consciousness to a subtle body, and still maintain your unique individuality (I have no problem doing this, and I am very happy to hear that you can do this too). The problem is that some folks can't do this very well, get mixed up, and wind up in a mess. In a worst-case scenario, a person can actually get mentally unbalanced from this, and never quite be able to return to their former mental state. But yes, you can merge psyches and yet remain distinct (in fact, this is the preferred method). Thanks for clearing up these points, especially for those who are still learning all of this. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:31:07 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Hi Paul Paul. Hi. I haven't heard from you in a long time but I am glad to hear that your book is now officially published. I recently finished my masters (MSA from Central Michigan) as did my wife, Betty. Nothing like going back to school when you're fifty. But then, I still haven't decided what I want to do when I grow up. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 20:40:47 -0500 From: "Louise C. Mead" Subject: Re: Mind seeing Mind Richard talking about Richard, is that anything like Mind seeing Mind. The laughing Buddha must be enjoying this debate. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1993 21:34:39 -0500 From: John Mead Subject: Re: Mind seeing Mind > > Richard talking about Richard, is that anything like Mind seeing Mind. > The laughing Buddha must be enjoying this debate. > Robert --- was that one to go to buddha-l?? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 10:44:35 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: incarnation on the other globes One of the early doctrines that we are introduced to in our study of Theosophy is the seven princples. These are the various ingredients that combine together to form a complete consciousness. We quickly learn that the terms that the ideas are clothed in are used in a number of meanings. Often a deep truth, subject to possible misunderstanding or abuse, will be hidden behind words that seem to convey a simpler meaning. This quickly becomes apparent as we see how many different things that are described in terms of the seven principles. We learn that the principles are not bodies, and they are not selves. The selves are the Monads, with their corresponding Egos and Souls, and they include the Divine Monad, the Spiritual, Human, and Beast Monads. Each is a being in its own right, and of them, we are the Human Monad, although not really, fully human until the Fifth Round. Another thing that we learn is of the illusory, deceptive nature of the psychical realm. It is easy to be mislead, to see what our thoughts and expectations would have us see, to populate our experience with the content of our own personal consciousness. We learn that the psychical senses mislead, and we should rely on spiritual sight, which describes the mind directly beholding something, as though by the sense of sight, a form of knowing arrived at by directing the mind at the object of contemplation. Anywhere that we man manifest our consciousness, where we can come into being, we clothe ourselves in the seven principles. That is, we take on the fabric of consciousness. These principles are not bodies, except for the lowest, the physical, the Sthula Sharira. And it is not required for full consciousness. Without it, where we sufficiently advanced, we could still exist in full awareness as a Nirmanakaya. When we read of such a thing as a "astral body" or a "mental body", it is something of a blind, since Kama and Kama-Manas are not bodies, they are elements of consciousness, and bodies are the lowest of a complete set of seven principles. The blind is for the teaching of Monads, Egos, and Souls, which was interwoved with that of the seven principles. The *places* that we can come into being are called the globes. And these globes or worlds are on different planes. When we say that they are on different planes, we're saying that they emphasize a different principle of consciousness as their keynote, not that they have any fewer of the principles. Each globe is composed of astral light, condensed into solid substance, and the difference in material existence between one and the next is related to which principle sounds the keynote of the nature of things on that globe. The substance of a globe may, for example, be most responsive to thought, but it could not be called "mental matter". That would be taking a figure of speech as a literal reality. On each globe, when we are fully-embodied, we have a physical body of the corresponding type of matter. But when we speak of a physical body, we're not talking about the matter that we see our physical earth, Globe D, composed of. The other globes are not on the physical plane, as we known it. There is the Sthula Sharira or physical that correspondings to any globe. That is, each globe has the element of consciousness to it that we'd called physical. It has a physical plane consciousness to it even if the globe itself is on a higher plane. When we look at the sky with our Globe D eyes, we see only the matter of other planets and celestial bodies that our Globe D is in relation to. All of space would be filled with worlds were we to see all that really surrounds us! But when we look out into space, it's incorrect to say that we gaze with our *physical* eyes, because the sense of sight is astral, based upon the sixth principle, the Linga Sharira, and not physical itself. We read that a plane is both a state of consciousness and that a plane is a state of matter corresponding to the perceptive powers of a particular set of senses. That is, the matter and the senses go together, the sixth and seventh principles are interconnected. We only perceive that matter which corresponds to our higher six principles. The physical of any plane is that which has been brought forth from Atman, then Buddhi, all the way down through the Linga Sharira, and finally becoming the physical, the Sthula Sharira. The final step is in the act of perception, the sixth principle, creating that which is perceived, the seventh, the object beheld by the senses. On other planes, we have unfolded from within our seven principles, down through the senses, and then to the final step of the making of the actual forms that contain us, the physical thereon. We can exist on a globe with less than our seven principles. There are actually three basic seats or upadhis of existence, the physical, the intermediate, and the causal. This might correspond to the separation of the seven principles into the Vital-Astral-Physical, the Kama-Manas, and Buddhi-Manas. The principles can be separated by us at these points without a resulting death. When we leave the physical behind, we have no personal form, no body of any kind. When we leave the astral, the Linga Sharira behind, we have lost our sensory imput of the external world behind, and then only see what we ourselves populate our surroundings with (e.g. images in the astral light). And when we leave the life energy behind, the Prana, we have lost our power to effect the external world and make karma, and are now in a passive or subjective state of existence, a state of being rather than a state of action. We are then in a state where, if we where in the after-death states, would be called Kamaloka. We can visit the other globes in our higher principles, and not have to take on all the seven principles on them. We can visit without becoming fully embodied thereon. This is what we do in devachan between lives. When we visit the other globes in our higher triad, then we have a sense of self with pure thought, but no kama-manasic attachment to the activities on those globes, no pull into full existence that would lead to activities with resulting new karma. This is what we experience in deep meditation, where we partake of the higher qualities of consciousness without actually projecting our consciousness to any other particular place. We can experience an influence of the other globes, and thereby of their ruling sacred planets, without the lengthy process of birth and childhood and growth to maturity thereon. That is, we do not have to grown to maturity a fully developed personality on any of the other globes, with the resulting karmic web of involvements with other people living there. We do not need to evolve forth a Globe E personality, for instance--with considerably more difficulty that our Globe D personalities take, where we even able to know how to do it. We just, in our spiritual nature, partake of the inner nature of the other globe, we experience it in our higher nature. The globes are like a string of pearls, being Monads at different stages of development. The stream of consciousness sweeps downward through the Monads from the highest to the lowest, and circulates back up again through each Monad in succession, back to the highest. Each such Monad is a seven-principled being on its own plane of consciousness. And on each such Globe we also may fully clothe our consciousness in the seven principles. We are not, though, required to *fully* clothe our consciousness, and can pass through the globes with just the higher principles. It is even possible to pass a globe without *existing* at all thereon, that that would be by only clothing ourselves in the highest triad (principles eight, nine, and ten, the unmanifest ones). The globes all interpenetrate and affect each other. And they are paired up. Globes C & E are on the same plane, for instance, and might, from one point of view, represent the dual nature of the same being, and partake of the nature of the plane that the two globes are one. One part of the nature is downward, matter-seeking, which would be the nature of life on Globe C. The other part is upward, spirit-seeking, the nature of life on Globe E. Our globe, Globe D, is an exception, since on it we reach a turning point. It partakes of both natures, the downward and the upward. We fell both pulls. The natural course of existence is to exhaust the downward pull of matter and to have an inner transformation, where we learn to turn about and yearn and reach out for the spiritual again. There is danger though, of failure, where the turn is not made, and we become lost to the planetary chain. Our physical plane, as we know it, is *not* the lowest plane, and it is as possible to fail and drop below our planetary chain as it is to one day to transcend it for higher worlds. Now the Kamaloka of the Globe D personality is a state of consciousness on Globe D itself, where we are functioning apart from the lowest principles. We are still in existence, and still interconnected with others in our essential natures, but we are not in a causal state. We have, in this state, given up our participation in the activities of life on the globe. We have given up our form, our external sensory imput, and our ability to affect things, our life energies. We are dead to the world, and have no body or form thereon. We are blind to the world, and see only what we make ourselves. We are impotent to act in the world, and can only affect ourselves. Kamaloka is not accociated with other globes, but is one of several states of consciousness that we have on this globe. It is one of several states that we have all the time, and one that we go through in succession during our after death states, as we not only shift away from the principles, but drop them, one after the other, until we are freed of all existence on this globe. When we depart our physical body, in dream, vision, trance, the typical experience is not to visit other realms of being, but rather to just experience our intermediate principles here on Globe D. We populate the world about us with the content of our own consciousness. The beings that we see arise from our own nature. And we have not visited other planes through coming into being on the higher globes. It is possible to have existences on the other globes. It is possible if we are spiritually progressed, have undergone initiation, and are assisted in the activity by the Mahatmas. We need to be on the Path, to have dedicated our lifes to the betterment of the world, and have special help in the hastening of our evolution. When we would exist on one of the other globes, we would have that existence as our primary focus in life, and probably not have incarnation on Globe D. We would be going through the difficult process of fashioning ourselves a personality out of the substance of a higher globe, a higher plane, and that would be the central focus of our life for a period of time. We would have our embodiments on that globe rather than on Globe D, and would appear to be freed of the requirement to seek rebirth on the earth, because that requirement would have temporarily transferred to the other globe. When, in this state, we would pass through Globe D, we would not fully clothe our consciousness in it, we would not take up all seven principles, including a physical form, but would rather pass through its atmostphere only in our higher principles. This process of seeking rebirth on the other globes is necessary to allow us to one day become Fifth Rounders, where we have outstripped humanity in our evolution by an entire Round, and have become Mahatmas. It is quite an involved subject, and needs a lot of review to give a clear outline of it. It involves the deep mysteries of initiation, and little has been spoken plainly of about it. When we hear of others moving their circle of rebirth to another globe, and having advanced ahead on the Path, we must not assume that the same would be good for ourselves. We do not ready ourselves for further progress by external imitation. To take any step requires an inner readiness, a ripening that happens over time, and it not a matter of simply acting like someone greater. We do not become Masters by pretending to be them, by doing and saying the things that they do. We become Masters by internally *becoming*, by a steady growth towards the light, by a inner awakening that happens over time due to the constant, continual dwelling of our minds and hearts in the spiritual. It is possible, for humanity in general, to exist on Globe E when the human lifewave has moved there. It is also possible for certain individuals, involved in the work of the Hierarchy of Compassion, with help, to exit on Globe E before that time. But it is not possible for any of us, on our own, unassisted, to fully embody ourselves on Globe E, anymore than it would be possible for any of us to write "The Secret Doctrine" from what we already know, unassisted. We might read of the various globes and want to exist on them. But not only is our progress not helped by seeking experience on other planes (globes), it is often hindered, and that is why we are taught as a general rule *to shut down the psychical side to life* as an aspect of our spiritual training, as a prerequisite to chelalife. Our spiritual progress is made by the higher nature infilling our lives. It is a natural, embracing, ruling experience, and there's no sense of guilt or should be's to it. We are not preaching to ourselves, but rather are blessed with a living presence and an active force in our lives. The training is one of consciousness, not of sense perception on whatever plane, and it does not matter what place on earth we may travel to, or whatever heavenworld or plane or globe we may visit, if we haven't changed ourselves the visit has been in vain. We are taught to seek first the kingdom of heaven, and all else will be given to us. And we do that. In our training, we seek the heavenly, the spiritual and divine essence of our beings, and the whole emphasis of our work is to dwell in that nature, to put that aspect of consciousness before everything else. It is the keynote, the primary, the controlling focus of our consciousness, and the personality and the mayavic senses are lived in, and subject to our inner nature, rather than the ruling forces in our lives. By dwelling in the highest, we make that our home, within our consciousness, we make it habitual to sit it in, to live in it, and one day our higher principles will become our seat of consciousness, and instead of being Human Monads, we will have become something more. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 12:06:07 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: chelas book proposal This one could use input from all of you-- Jerry, Jerry, Eldon, Nancy in particular. Today I'm sending a book proposal to SUNY Press for a sequel to the book they have in production. The tentative title is The Chelas: Disciples of Theosophical Masters. I have some unused manuscript material on two thirds of the characters, either from In Search of the Masters or stuff never published. Here's the theme: capsule biographies of about 7 pages each on figures identifiable as chelas of the Masters in the first book. Either evidence of direct relationship or relationship through HPB suffices for inclusion, but no post-HPB chelas unless there is independent evidence of historical connection. Here's the table of contents: Introduction, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. Chapters 1-24, Henry Steel Olcott, William Quan Judge*, Muhammad Abduh, Adib Ishaq*, Damodar Mavalankar, Godolphin Mitford*, S. Ramaswamier, T. Subba Row*, S. Krishnaswami (Babaji D. Nath), Prince Harisinghji Rupsinghji, Keshava Pillai, Mohini Chatterji, Norendro Nath Sen, William T. Brown, Franz Hartmann, Charles W. Leadbeater, Anagarika Dharmapala, Annie Besant*, Mirza Reza, Prince Esper Ukhtomskii, George Ivanovitch Gurdjieff, Isabelle Eberhardt, Mirra Alfassa Richard, Alexandra David-Neel. Conclusion: Jiddu Krishnamurti. (Asterisk identifies characters on whom I currently have nothing written). Any suggestions from you all about who to include and leave out? Needless to say, the Olcott, Besant, Gurdjieff and Krishnamurti sections will be twice as long as the others. Throughout, the theme will be "How was this person's life transformed by the Master/Chela relationship as mediated and defined by Theosophy?" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 14:41:46 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: quotes on globes and keys This is by Brenda Tucker. Friends, Where Eldon says we have to believe the books, he may mean that you yourself have to formulate methods of testing the hypotheses in the books. No real teacher ever recommended blind belief just to create living conditions. These living patterns would not be based on "real" knowledge. H.P.B. is able to present the different viewpoints as if they are all different aspects of the ONE TRUTH. For example, from my previous p. xxxvii quote from THE SECRET DOCTRINE, "As to those who may reject her testimony, -i.e., the great majority - she will bear them no malice, for they will be as right in their way in denying, as she is right in hers in affirming, since they look at TRUTH from two entirely different stand-points. Agreeably with the rules of critical scholarship, the Orientalist has to reject A PRIORI whatever evidence he cannot fully verify for himself. And how can a Western scholar accept on hearsay that which he knows nothing about?" And from p. 592 THE SECRET DOCTRINE, "There are learned Brahmans who have protested against our septenary division. They are right from their own standpoint, as we are right from ours. So when we change our life, it doesn't mean this is final or that we won't change again in the future after either affirming or denying what we read and decide to test with our own life. I think it is from people's methods of living that the globes and planes are understood as they are by people on this network. I don't ever remember reading anything like what many are expressing as their understanding of globe chains. I understood that the kingdoms of nature precede man on a progression from globe to globe, and that this would mean that the great bulk of the minerals are on globe G, the 7th globe, most vegetables are evolving now on Globe F, and the animal kingdom has Globe E on which to maintain superiority. So why you might ask are there still minerals, vegetables, and animals on this Globe, Globe D? One reason might be, that when it was time to move the life wave on to the next globe, the Manu, to do so, only had to take a sample of each kind or seeds of each kind of plant. (See p. 307 II SD) There was no reason to take the entire population of plant life, the millions and thousands of plants living on the globe which the life wave was leaving, because when the life wave reached the new globe, the plant kingdoms would expand from just a few seeds of each type until there were thousands and millions of plants all sprung from the few seeds that were gathered from the last globe. As the evolution of a plant is not generally completed until the seventh round, seventh globe. All of the plants from previous globes gathering together with the main bulk of plants which were able to establish themselves as the forms were made ready for them, contributing their own special qualities and services to the final stage of being plants so that they could enter the animal kingdom largely as one entity. This might be a good reason for the acceptance of group souls. As plants are evolving on globe F, what remains behind here on Globe D is only a quiescent sort of remainder that can sustain the forms until the life wave returns in the next round. A very good book to read on this subject is CYCLIC EVOLUTION by Adam Warcup who is currently the General Secretary of the T.S. in Great Britain. Our study center in Los Angeles used this book a few years ago and it consists of quotes from THE SECRET DOCTRINE and THE MAHATMA LETTERS presented in an organized fashion according to topic. Each chapter of quotes is then supported with additional references in the second part of this two part work. Also look at A.P. Sinnett's ESOTERIC BUDDHISM, 5th edition, p.146-7 or p.327-28 6th edition. (This reference is found in THE SECRET DOCTRINE.) The Manus mentioned in THE SECRET DOCTRINE reference above are spoken of in relation to the human kingdom only, but through analogy the same principle may be applied to the plants. There's a really strange quote by W.Q. Judge about how our eyes used to be tentacles, just as all of our senses before refining had to reach out and make contact with an object. Following this thought to a logical conclusion, our present use of senses in a spiritual manner is one of quieting or stilling the senses to the point that a general disuse may follow as the intuition and inner senses become more developed. If you could imagine the human life wave leaving Globe D (in concert with the mineral life wave passing to obscuration before beginning again on Globe A) and leaving behind its seventh round human "root" to preserve the forms for use upon its return, you may find that to be a race of humans with very limited physical senses, but a general spiritual existence, until the return of the life wave. Globe D at this time is turned over to the Dhyan Chohans for the exercise and evolution of their faculties. What are the rest of you people talking about? Can you document it? Jerry H-E: Mention of a metrological key is found on p. 595 Vol II SD. "To the metrological key of the symbolism of the Hebrews, which reveals numerically the geometrical relations of the Circle (All- Deity) to the Square, Cube, Triangle, and all the integral emanations of the divine area, may be added the theogonic Key. This Key explains that Noah, the deluge-Patriarch, is in one aspect the permutation of the Deity (the Universal Creative Law), for the purpose of the formation of our Earth, its population, and the propagation of life on it, in general." And if you try to argue away the integral value in my presentation of the keys mentioned in THE SECRET DOCTRINE, like you did before, in favor of your own listing of seven keys, I'd just like to challenge you to present your keys as well as I did mine, with actual quotes that were put there for the interpretation and use by the group in any way they see fit. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 15:37:51 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: music and the symphony of life One experience of life is little mentioned when we talk about the Esoteric Philosophy and the Path: the experience of music and the arts. This is perhaps because the importance of the intellectual development is often overlooked, and we feel that it must be brought up again and again. Music and the arts has a direct tie to the spiritual side of life. It can also link us to the emotional, psychological, psychical, and sensory side of life as well. It can bring it into touch with any part of our natures. It is an another aspect of communication, different than the spoken word, but also value and power in our lives. One aspect of music is that everyone, every manifest being, everything that exists in the world has a characteristic keynote, a characteristic nature, a unique consciousness that adds something different to the symphony of life. That nature has a basic theme, from the individual's Monad, and a series of variations on the theme, as the personality unfolds and expresses itself in life. The rendition of the music, the playing of one's sound, is almost as thought there were a soundtrack to a person's life. When we look at the nature of the mind, we see that in addition to the vast repository of thought, of memory, of experiences that the mind contains, there is a narrative voice, a inner speaker that gives verbal expression to one thought at a time. There is a *reader* to the contents of our mind. In a similar sense, if we look at the experience of the mind in terms of music, there is a storehouse of experiences associated with various melodies, and these experiences also continually arise, according to the direction of a orchestrating voice, a inner conductor of the music of the mind, that selects the refrains of music that will arise moment to moment during our lives. Various theosophical groups have emphasized the arts in the past, and considered their importance in the growth and cultivation of one's higher side, of one's character. One example is the work that Kathrine Tingley did at her Point Loma Theosophical Community, which for several decades had a strong emphasis in the artistic side of life, and might have considered an appreciation of something like music on an equal basis, with a study of "The Secret Doctrine." Just as there is in the study of thought, the words that we clothe our thoughts in, and the actual ideas themselves, behind and beyond those words, there is also in music the melodies themselves, and the experiences of the inner nature that clothe themselves in those notes. Our higher principles can be experienced by association with music, just as well as with thought, in meditation, or in selfless action in the world. There is a psychical side to music as well, where we hear sounds that come from others, from external sources, where there is no control over the association of the sounds to the experiences. The sound is a carrier of forces, and we cannot always tell what is carried with psychical sounds untell we observe their effects upon us. Just as there is a silence behind the words that we contemplate, a silence that reaches deeply into mysteries of being, there is a silence that we can sink into with special works of music. We can use the music as a carrier that takes us into spiritual spaces within. And this silence, this emptiness, is that of a sweet nothingness, of sunyata, and is without words or sounds of any kind. The silvery tinkle of astral bells are far removed from this experience, as are the mindless slogans of television commericals, empty words stuck in our minds that go around and around without meaning. We each have our characteristic song, and we can have an appreciation of the song of other people we meet in life. And the song is heard in the silence, and not with mortal ears. Let us listen to the symphony of life and be inspired! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 15:41:48 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: revision of prior post This is by Brenda Tucker. Friends, In reading over what I just wrote, I decided it needed further clarification in places and made revisions to two paragraphs where necessary. I hope this is a little easier to read. So why you might ask are there still minerals, vegetables, and animals on this Globe, Globe D? One reason might be, that when it was time to move the life wave on to the next globe, the Manu, to do so, only had to take a sample of each kind or seeds of each kind of plant. (See p. 307 II SD) There was no reason to take the entire population of plant life, the millions and thousands of plants living on the globe which the life wave was leaving, because when the life wave reached the new globe, the plant kingdoms would expand [into the forms that were left there] from just a few seeds of each type until there were thousands and millions of plants [with new evolved qualities] all sprung from the few seeds that were gathered [transferred] from the last globe. As the evolution of a plant is not generally completed until the seventh round, seventh globe, all of the plants from previous globes gathering together with the main bulk of plants which were able to establish themselves as [the main current of the life wave in which] the forms [on the seventh globe in the seventh round] were made ready for them, [each set of plant life from each globe] contributing their own special qualities and services to the final stage of being plants so that they could enter the animal kingdom largely as one entity. This might be a good reason for the acceptance of group souls. As plants are evolving on globe F, what remains behind here on Globe D is only a quiescent sort of remainder that can sustain the forms until the life wave returns in the next round. There's a really strange quote by W.Q. Judge (This is found in the Preface to the YOGA APHORISMS of Patanjali, found second-hand in Purucker's Esoteric Teachings, Vol. II, p. 77 in a footnote.) about how our eyes used to be tentacles, just as all of our senses before refining had to reach out and make contact with an object. [I am] following this thought to a logical conclusion [and proposing that] our present use of senses in a spiritual manner is one of quieting or stilling the senses to the point that a general disuse may follow as the intuition and inner senses become more developed. If you could imagine the human life wave leaving Globe D (in concert with the mineral life wave passing to obscuration before beginning again on Globe A) and leaving behind its seventh round human "root" to preserve the forms for use upon [rather until man's] its return [in the fifth round], you may find that [the remaining root of what used to be human] to be a race [remainder] of humans with very limited physical senses, but a general spiritual existence, [who would remain through a cycle of six inhabitations by other kingdoms] until the return of the human life wave. Globe D at this time [when the human life wave passes to Globe E] is turned over to the Dhyan Chohans [or first elemental kingdom, I don't know which] for the exercise and evolution of their faculties. Au Revoir From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 15:49:13 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: chelas book proposal On reflection, I decided to delete Judge, Leadbeater and Besant as chapters and the conclusion on Krishnamurti. Instead, a conclusion called "The Mystery of Annie Besant" is proposed which will touch on her relations with WQJ, CWL and K as channels to the Masters. This "brackets" the discussion in a way that doesn't imply, as the other chapters do, that the persons involved had a genuine connection to HPB's Masters. In these four cases, that is a highly debatable proposition and should be treated as such. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 16:51:47 -0500 From: "Leonard E. Cole"<71664.3642@compuserve.com> Subject: Season's Greetings < < Season's Greetings \ / < from -=|=- < / | \ < Leonard and Rauha Cole .^. < ^^*^^ < ^*^^^0^*^ < ^0^^*^^^^*^^^ < + ^^^*^0^^*^0^^*^^^ < /^\ ^^^*^^^^*^^^^*^^0^^*^ < //*\\ ^^^*^^^0^^^*^^^^0^^^^*^^^ < ///^\\\ ^^^*^^^^*^^^^^^*^^^^0^^^*^^^^ < //// \\\\ ^^^!^^*^^0^^*^^^0^^*^^^^!^^^^0^^^ < ///*/^\*\\\ ^*^^0^^^^*^^^^^^^*^^^^^^*^^^^^*^^^^ < //#///*\\\#\\ ^^!^^^^*^^0^^^*^^^^^*^^^^^^*^^^0^^*^^ < ////~//^\\~\\\\ ^^^^*^^^^^^*^^^^^0^^^^*^^^!^^^^^^*^ < //~/~///*\\\~\~\\ ^^!^^^*^^^^0^^^^*^^^^0^^^^*^^^!^^ < /////////^\\\\\\\\\ ^!^^*^^^^*^^^0^^*^^!^ < [ ] ______|||______ < < (design by Tim Campbell) (design by Pete Bodett) < From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 20:06:51 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Globes To Eldon. You wrote: My comments. Somewhere HPB writes (and I agree) that you can't pass any planes coming down from spirit or going up from matter. I forget exactly where she says this, but it struck me profoundly at the time I read it, and I never forgot it. You can't skip a plane. This has a lot of ramifications. For one thing, it means that all physical things are alive and have a soul (ie., everything is sevenfold, albeit not fully developed on this physical plane at this time.) So, to answer your question, yes, you must pass through Manas and no, there is no "direct link." I would say that yes, the "unified nature of the qualities" is a sort of bridge. It is based on the old occult principle of "wheels within wheels" described by Ezekiel and others. It reflects the fact that we are each a microcosm of the macrocosm. Just as each plane can be divided into 7 subplanes, so each of our "bodies" has 7 principles. I look forward to discussing the subject of the globes, because while much has already been given out, there is still a lot of information that has been withheld. For example, the evolutionary passages of lifewaves through the globes has been pretty well described in theosophical literature. But you will find almost nothing at all on pathworking. The fact that pathworking is a magical operation is doubtless why nothing has been said, although this can't be the whole of it. Leadbeater, for example, goes to rather great lengths to describe the astral and mental planes (which he surely visited via magic or yoga), but never links them to the globes. Was this an oversight, or a deliberate omission?. Why describe the planes and not the globes, which, as you pointed out, are where we are localized on each plane? Was Leadbeater writing about the globes without being aware of it? Why was G de P so reluctant to describe a globe? He presented their planetary and Zodiac attributions and then fell silent. Should theosophists remain silent, or is it time to say something about the globes, especially about the lower ones which we inhabit all the time (as Don has so elequently described) and yet have no awareness or memory? Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 00:35:46 -0500 From: Andrew Rooke Subject: The Guardian Wall Some weeks ago we floated the idea of regularly publishing the newsletter of the Australasian TS(Pasadena) on the network. Following comments from a number of interested people, the editorial team felt that network members might be more interested in a selected article from the newsletter every now and then rather than all the regular news items in the complete publication. In this spirit we are sending the following from the Dec 1990 issue, we'd be happy of any feedback from members of the list as to whether we should continue listing articles this way: THE GUARDIAN WALL On March 23rd, 1989 the world narrowly avoided possibly the greatest physical catastrophe in known human history - and nobody realized until a week later. An asteroid, a huge chunck of rock measuring half a mile across and travelling at 50,000 miles per hour, passed within 450,000 miles of the Earth - a close shave in cosmic terms. Had this asteroid hit the Earth, the impact would have left a crater 5 to 10 miles wide and a mile deep. If the asteroid had landed in the ocean, it could have created tidal waves several hundred meters high. Other close calls in recent history include near misses by Comet Lexell in 1770 (1.4 million miles), asteroid Hermes in 1937 (490,000 miles), and Comet Iras-Arakl-Alcock in 1983 (2.9 million miles). In ancient times a comet impact 65 million years ago is believed by many scientists to have contributed to the extinction of the dinosaurs which had ruled the earth (according to science) for 100 million years. Theosophical teachers tell us that the Masters of Wisdom are continuously acting as the "Guardian Wall" shielding, and protecting mankind from a vast array of cosmic and terrestrial dangers. Although I don't know of any specific instances where the Earth has been so protected, we are told that these dangers arise continuously at many levels - spiritual, intellectual, psychical, and astral. In addition to the spectacular physical dangers with which we are more familiar... "They are the cosmic dangers reaching our earth from outside, from other planets of the solar system, and from dead planets, our moon in particular... and from rivers of lives circulating throughout the living being of the solar system which seek to enter our earth's atmosphere (from G de Purucker The Fountain Source of Occultism p.676). In particular, the Karmic harvest of Humanity's collective disharmonious acts and thoughts would threaten us if not "dammed back" as far as they are able karmically by members of the Brotherhood of Compassion. Perhaps the greatest such dangers facing mankind today are the psychical epidemics sweeping the world, distracting our thoughts from spirituality and misleading us from fulfilling our true human potential. It is said that the Great Ones protect Humanity with their enlightened knowledge of the divine potencies of sound, "singing" these dangers as far as is karmically possible, into the "akasa" (the kosmical spirit substance). At this time of the year in secret places around the globe, it could be that one or many brave souls undergo the trials of the Winter Solstice which may fit them one day to be another stone in the Guardian Wall. Unknown and unrecognized by the majority of humanity, they work selflessly to protect mankind and provide an environment that will give us the time and opportunity to learn the lessons of life. Inspired by the little we know of their example, let us hearken to the true message of this Sacred Season, and go forward into the new year in the same compassionate spirit. Further reading : Information on the deeper significance of the Christmas/Winter Solstice season is available in G de Purucker's book The Four Sacred Seasons. H.P. Blavatsky wrote of the Guardian Wall in her Voice of the Silence: "Self doomed to live through future Kalpas, unthanked and unperceived by man; wedged as a stone with countless other stones which form the "Guardian Wall", such is thy future if the seventh gate thou passest. Built by the hand of many Masters of Compassion, raised by their tortures, by their blood cemented, it shields mankind, since man is man, protecting it from further and far greater misery and sorrow. Withal man sees it not, will not perceive it, nor will he heed the word of Wisdom... for he knows it not. But thou hast heard it, thou knowest all, O thou eager guileless Soul... and thou must choose." (p.68) With good wishes to all, Andrew Rooke - Melbourne - Australia From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 04:44:32 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Paul's book, seven keys Paul Johnson I think your prospective book is needed. You might look at the material on Soobah Chetty that Michael Gomes recently published. Your book would have the greatest value as a reference resource if you make it as a compilation. But as I read between the lines in your second communication, it is obvious that this is not your intention. Regarding Leadbeater, Besant, Judge, and Krishnamurti, you might keep in mind that the questions concerning the authenticity of their contacts with the Masters is basically politically motivated. Personally, I see no reason to question that Leadbeater's three 1884 letters from the Masters are genuine. Nor do I see any reason to dispute the authenticity of the 1900 letter to Besant. In fact, the recently revealed passages that were censored by Jinarajadasa, very accurately warned her against the very things that Blavatsky students have been for years criticizing her for. Brenda Tucker May I applaud your argument that H.P.B. never intended her writings to be taken on blind faith. As you have aptly shown, she warns against this all through the SD. The same warnings are also found in ISIS UNVEILED, THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, and scattered all through her articles. I'm also glad you brought up Adam Warcup's CYCLIC EVOLUTION. This is by far the best work I have ever seen on the subject, and the only that I can think of that I believe to be correct in all of its details. It is a work that receives far less attention than it deserves. Thank you for finding the quote for the "metrological key." I had forgotten about her use of that word, but as Eldon and I mentioned in the past, H.P.B. had more than one term for some of the keys. When I gave the list, I wasn't able to find my last copy of the SD (I keep wearing them out), where I had a more complete set of notes on the seven keys. And as I said in my Dec. 17th, communication, I was (and still am) in the middle of a paper, and had no time to dig it up. "Metrology" is of course the science of weights and measures. In her phrase, the "metrological key of the symbolism of the Hebrews" she is of course talking about the Geometric Key, under its numerical aspect. However, if you want to argue that "Metrological" is a better term than "Geometric," then I would consider this a matter of taste. I'm afraid that my intentions concerning my citations were (understandably) misinterpreted. My short explanations of the keys were from the top of my head. I wrote them hours after I should have been in bed. They were intended to give a rough idea of each key, and not a definitive explanation. My explanations had nothing to do with the page numbers I cited. The page numbers were just references where interested readers could look up mentions of the keys for themselves (And this is a lesson for me for staying up too late, as a couple of the citations were the correct page, but wrong volume number). Therefore, my notations under the keys were not intended to be interpretations of those pages I cited. I did not bother to transcribe the pages I cited for two reasons: 1. I didn't feel that the quotes would add anything to the discussion. 2. Anyone sufficiently interested in this discussion could look the citations up for themselves. However, since you feel that it will help matters, here are some citations, along with an amended list of alternative terms she used for the seven keys in parentheses) . Anything that is not a direct transcription is in square brackets, and are intended to put the quote in context, not to distort the meaning. Volume and page citations are in parentheses: 0. General Mention of Keys As for the Hebrews, in all their writings they show no more than a thorough knowledge of the astronomical, geometrical and numerical systems of symbolizing all the human, and especially the physiological functions. They never had the higher keys (I 311). For the comprehension of the Occult Doctrine is based on that of the seven sciences; which sciences find their expression in the seven different applications of the secret records to the exoteric texts. Thus we have to deal with seven modes of thought on seven entirely different planes of reality. Every text relates to, and has to be rendered from, one of the following standpoints (II 335). 1. Theogonic (mystical): This interpretation of the "ark" symbolism does not in the least interfere with its astronomical, or even theogonic keys; nor with any of the other six meanings. Nor does it seem less scientific that the modern theories about the origin of man (II 291). [Referring to the Theogonic key applied to Genesis]: "This key explains that Noah, the deluge-Patriarch, is in one aspect the permutation of the Deity (the Universal Creative Law), for the purpose of the formation of our Earth, its population, and the propagation of life on it, in general" (II 595). 2. Anthropological (Human, anthroposophical): [Footnote referring to an interpretation of the ark symbolism in the allegory of the Vaivasvata Manu. She says in the body of the text that: "the `Ark' (or again the vehicle) simply means man." ] This is the meaning when the allegory and symbol are opened and read by means of the human key or the key to terrestrial anthroposophy. (II 291) [Commentary referring to a sloka in Stanza V.] Remember in this connection the ~Tabula smaradina~ of Hermes, the esoteric meaning of which has seven keys to it. The Astro- Chemical is well known to students, the anthropological may be given now. The "one thing" mentioned in it is MAN. It is said: "The Father of THAT ONE ONLY THING is the Sun; its Mother the Moon; the Wind carries it in its bosom, and its nurse is the Spirituous Earth." In the occult rendering of the same its is added: "and spiritual Fire is its instructor (Guru)." (II 109) 3. Astro-Chemical [Commentary referring to a sloka in Stanza V.] Remember in this connection the ~Tabula smaradina~ of Hermes, the esoteric meaning of which has seven keys to it. The Astro- Chemical is well known to students, the anthropological may be given now (II 109) 4. Numerical [Regarding a "cosmo-metaphysical interpretation of God revealing his back to Moses] This is correct, and is the cosmo-metaphysical explanation. And now speaks the other Kabalist, giving the numerical meaning (II: 539). It had been declared from the first and has been repeatedly asserted since that (1st) no Theosophist, not even as an accepted chela~let alone lay students~could expect to have the secret teachings explained to him thoroughly and completely, before he had irretrievably pledged himself to the Brotherhood and passed through at least one initiation, because no figures and numbers could be given to the public, for figures and numbers are the key to the esoteric system. (2.) That what was revealed was merely the esoteric lining of that which is contained in almost all the exoteric Scriptures of the world- religions~pre-eminently in the Brahm~nas, and the Upanishads of the Vedas and even in the Pur~nas. It was a small portion of what is divulged far more fully now in the present volumes; and even this is very incomplete and fragmentary (I 164). 5. Geometric (Metrological, Geometry) With them [Talmudic Jews], as now shown by the discovery of the key to the correct Bible reading--Geometry, the fifth divine science ("Fifth"--because it is the fifth key in the series of the Seven Keys to the Universal esoteric language and symbology) was desecrated, and by them applied to conceal the most terrestrial and grossly sexual mysteries, wherein both deity and religion were degraded (II 471). To the metrological key to the symbolism of the Hebrews which reveals numerically and geometrical relations to the Circle (All Deity) to the Square, Cube, Triangle, and all the integral emanations of the divine area, may be added the theogonic key (II 595) 6. Astronomical (Cosmo-Metaphysical) It is true that the nature of Michael depends upon that of his Creator and Master. Who the latter is, one may find out by carefully studying the allegory of the "War in Heaven" with the Astronomical key (II 63). [Quoting from THE QABBALAH, by Issac Myer] "That is, I will show you `my back,' i.e., my visible universe, my lower manifestations, but, as a man still in the flesh, thou canst not see my invisible nature. So proceeds the Qabbalah." This is correct, and is the cosmo-metaphysical explanation (II 539). 7. Physical (Matter) ...science has only one key~the key of matter~to open the mysteries of nature withal, while occult philosophy has seven keys and explains that which science fails to see (I 155 fn). As I wrote before, there are more citations then I have given here, but I don't have time to find them. But we really are getting away from the main point, which is that H.P.B. never names a "psychological key," but as you pointed out, she does mention a "psychological aspect" of interpretation. What would a psychological key be like anyway? H.P.B.'s statements liking the keys to language, is very evident (to me anyway). Psychology in the 1880's was associated with hypnotism, and was unknown in ancient times, except as a form of magic. But this aspect is well covered in ISIS UNVEILED, which she calls the "physcial key." Brewer was the big name in the 1880's, with Freud studying under him. The "Id, Ego and Super-ego" of Freud's famous theory had not yet been devised. In fact Freud was yet to publish his earlier version of "conscious, pre-conscious and unconscious." This latter typology didn't come out until 1900 with the publication of THE INTERPRETATION OF DREAMS. H.P.B. may have had a deeper understanding of psychology than the people of her time, but she never spoke of it outside of the understanding of her time. Psychology today is a discipline (or science, if you would rather) for the study of human behavior. It is not a symbolic language in the sense of the above keys, to which are attached symbols, allegories and motifs. I think the problem is that psychology has become so much a part of our lives since the 1920's that it is very easy to think of it as a key: especially since Freud drew so heavily from mythology for his theories. For instance the Oedipal Complex, named after Oedipus the King. But I cannot imagine how the language of a "psychological key" would be constructed. Would we take the various myths and interpret them in terms of human drives and desires? Jung, of course also drew heavily from mythology and made psychological interpretations of them. So, in a since we do have "psychological keys" but they were created by the psychoanalytic movement. I don't think that H.P.B. would object in general to these psychological interpretations, but I think they would more properly fall in her scheme under psychological aspects of the physical key, which H.P.B. says is the only one in the hands of science. Perhaps Jung's material relating to the Quest mythologies would be related to the psychological aspect of the anthrological key. The keys that H.P.B. has above are easy to recognize because she gives examples for the use of these keys all through the SD. If there is a "psychological key," why doesn't she give examples for its use? Why did she include it as an aspect of the physical key in ISIS UNVEILED? And which of the seven keys would it be another name for? Or, perhaps, which of the seven keys would it replace? Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 10:17:55 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the nature of space It is difficult to explore the nature of space, because of our materialistic western training. Without the proper groundwork in metaphysics, we cannot obtain the proper appreciation of what it really is. And with pure mathematics often associated with it, we are often misled as to its nature. Space is formless, without attribute nor dimension. When we speak of a three-dimensional space, we are really talking about matter that is restricted to behave in that manner. In thinking about mathematics, we may picture in our minds an abstract space with three dimensions, having an X, Y, and Z coordinate for every point, but such a space is just that, an abstract picture in our minds, and not a living reality. Consider for a moment a two-dimensional space formed of grains of sand between two panes of glass. It is the glass that constrains the sand to only move in two dimensions, and also exactly where and how those two dimensions are positioned. Without this contraint, the sand could move in an arbitrary number of directions. When we imagine space bending to form black holes in space, to show the effects of gravitation, we are really making for ourselves an unnecessary paradox, for there is *nothing* to space that could be bent. What we really have is the strengthening or weakening of the forces that hold matter to our three-dimensional world or universe, and is it these forces that vary, not anything that happens to space itself. Now picture the matter of our Globe D earth, and the universe in which it finds itself, on this, our physical plane. If it were not for the constraining forces that shape and fashion the behavior of our matter, we would not have a three-dimensional world. We would, instead, have everything capable of interpenetrating everything else, and a loss of objectivity. We would have the condition of matter in the astral light, apart from physical manifestation. Where these forces that contrain matter to be withdrawn, our world would cease to exist. Even thought the matter it was composed of had not dissappeared, every object would be on its own. Should a different set of constraints be applied to matter, to the material forms that everything is composed of, we would have existence on some other plane, although we would interpenetrate the physical plane and pass right through it. We occupy the same space, but our forms are tied together by different forces. Our earth is the embodiment of a greater being. When that being dies, its form dissolves and its contents returns to the elements of nature. Its indwelling life has been withdrawn and the substances that compose its body go back to the bigger world or universe in which our earth has lived its life. This is saying, in effect, that the constraining forces of its life are gone, and what remains is matter of a bigger world, matter still under the contraining forces of our solar system or universal solar system. This matter was drawn together and given a higher form during the life of the planet, and now returns to its solar state, the state that it had been in before the planet came into birth. The worlds and universes, then, are fashioned out of matter, and given their behavior, their characteristics, their intrinsic natures by the forces that draw them together and contrain their independent action. Space is not involved in this, for we are talking about matter and energy, not about what contains them. When we attempt to define space in terms of coordinate systems, where we might say that this point is at X1,Y1,Z1 and that point at X2,Y2,Z2, we are dealing with something that is relative and subjective. We have to pick a frame of reference. The measure is meaningless without objects to be subject to it. We may apply mathematics to physical objects and find that we can only carry them so far. The mathematical relations and approximations break down after a certain point. Consider a basketball. It could be called spherical, but with sufficient magnification we will find a roughness and irregularity to its surface and never an exact match to a sphere. Look at a coastline, which may have a fractal nature to its irregularity. This fractal nature may be true for a few scales of magnification, but soon the coastline dissappears, at the atomic scale, if not much sooner. Think about the chair that you might be sitting on. It may seem solid enough, but with sufficient magnification we come to see that it is empty space filled with interconnected atomic forces and particles. The mathematics does describe the physical objects, but just in general terms, and for a few scales of magnification. After a certain point, the mathematics no longer applies and the nature of the object itself disappears. Mathematics descibes general principles, and they have approximate application to the physical world. The nature of the approximation depends upon the type of object we are observing. Coming back to that basketball, we can say that it has the same number of mathematical points as does a baseball, the moon, or our sun. But these objects certainly do not have the same number of atoms! The objects are of different sizes, as they are known on our plane, even though the mathematics of a sphere may apply to all of them equally. Finite things are fashioned out of raw materials of the plane on which they come into existence on. They are subject to various higher forces. The effects of those forces may show various aspects of mathematical principles at work, as well as, for the inner side of the object, higher elements including desire, volition, and understanding. No matter how perfect the finite object, though, manifest existence is always an approximation to the inner forces at play. Considering the sphere, no matter how perfectly we may measure the circumference of one, we will never exactly reach pi, although that is the mathematical ideal, the true ratio, apart from any physical object, of the diameter to the circumference. The distinction that we are dealing with is between the ideas that seek manifestation, and the nature of life, which is always an approximation, an expression ever-seeking to better represent the inner life, but always falling short of the mark, due to the imperfect nature of manifest life. For a conscious entity, with his full ten principles, that ever-present ideal is swabhava. It is more than what we've accomplished, more than the karmic treasury of personal experience, stored in the Auric Egg, it is our Ever-Present Ideal Nature, our essential being, that is beyond the sweep of time itself. What we find ourselves to be now, at this moment in time, is the seven principles, the manifest consciousness that we've emanated from within during our present lifetime, which includes the substances of life or skandhas out of which the principles were fashioned. Space is not a mystery. We've just been led to misunderstand it. Space is not a mere container. Things originate out of it. It is consciousness itself, pure consciousness, and not an emptiness in the usual sense of the term. The spaces of space are the planes or realms of consciousness. We find ourselves in such a subspace or subplane, wherein there is a unique collection of laws of nature, which are due to the action of the architects of our world, the Dhyani-Buddhas. We find in a space that from the emptiness side arises law and order and from the fullness side arises the root substance out of which everything is formed. This duality forms the womb out of which new worlds arise. It might seem a paradox that our world is built up out of root substance, itself build up of root substance of a greater scheme of things, and that too of a still more primeval root substance. No matter how far back we trace the root material of our world, we find ourselves never reaching the final basis of matter, but always further steps that we could take. It might seem a paradox that our world, then, is formed of substance that is built up of matter in a bottom-up fashion, yet can only exist via a tree of life, formed in a top-down fashion. For the infoming life that fashions the universe and lends its Atman as the root consciousness of the world, this life cannot exist and come into birth unless it has a greater world into which to be born. And that greater world cannot exist without yet a still greater one to be born into. We have a golden tree of life, where each world is a branch off of a greater branch, where we never reach the root trunk, where there is no top-most being. It is a paradox that a world can only come into being where the endless tree of life reaches down and meets the bottomless nature of physicality. In our physical world, we have particles that come into being for a moment and then are gone. Perhaps they *pass through our space*. Are particles really transformed into other particles, or are they replaced by others that are allowed to enter our plane? The principle of the conservation of energy implies that any transformation leave the same amount of energy as before, but in some new form. But it is an explanation of what appears to happen, when we only see those energies that exist on the physical plane. Perhaps if we were able to see other planes as well, we'd see that the energy is not transformed, but rather exits our plane, as other energies enter our plane. Consider electricity in a wire, coming to a coil and producing a strong magnetic field. Say there's another coiled wire around the first coil, and we find the magnetic field converted into electricity in the other wire. We're talking about a transformer. Did electricity turn into magnetism, and that magnetism into electricity again? Or did the electricity leave our plane, replaced by magnetism, which then left our plane as electricity entered again? This might be considered a subtle distinction, to say that forces are not transformed, but are replaced by others in the manifest world, but has important significance when considering the way that things come into manifestation, and the nature of the elementals. Taking a philosophical standpoint, when we speak of entry into or exit from a plane, we refer to a being partaking of the nature of consciousness of that plane, and giving manifest expression to that consciousness. We might define a plane, then, as the collection of lives, energies, and forces that act upon matter in such a way as to constrain it to take on the form and function of a world or universe, and all that can be perceived in interacted with thereon. We might call a plane the range of consciousness that can be experienced within those constraints and using those energies and substances. Don't think of a plane, or think of space ass an empty container for so-called real things to possibly be in. In a way, though, space does *permit* objects in it to exist. Out of space its contents arise. It is the void, the emptiness that manifestation happens in. Space really has no position and is everywhere. When we talk about distance, we are speaking of a relationship between two objects, as measured in terms of a third object. Distance, apart from comparing objects, has no intrinsic meaning. Space is something that we cannot grasp, cannot contain. It is created or formed out of an object's existence and its privation, what the object is and what it is not. The spaces of space, the subspaces are the space or plane or consciousness that contains a collection of beings, all of which coexist, which cocreate each other, and arise out of the same sense of Atman. Space is the same as pure, unconditioned conscousness, and not at all a physical thing. It is the unmanifest side to life and nature. The memories of events inher in objects and in substance, like the astral light, but not in space itself. Any plane, any subspace, has, for practical purposes, a finite extent. Like our aura, which has an effective range, but a faint reach, as well, to the very ends of all that is, the same is true of planes or spaces. A space has its effective range as well, after which things can no longer exist. There is a practical extent to the end of the universe, where all goes dark and drops off into chaos. This is at the outer boundary to what can be. At the other end, the center, there is a laya-center out of which cosmos arises, from the heart of the world. At the heart of space is a laya center that takes us to other planes. At the outer fringe is a fractal-like boundary separating the space from chaos and non-existence. There is no universe with infinite extent. What we know of our universe and its outermost boundaries is our ring-pass-not of perception. That unverise is a world like our earth, but many scales of life bigger. And there are even greater scales than our universe, but our vision cannot penetrate to them. We could say, then, that a plane is the perceptible universe that we reside in, and all its worlds and beings. And it is a subplane of a still greater universe. And our world or globe is a very minor subplane of the universe that we find ourselves in. The idea of a plane as all of space, invluding all we see and more, without mathematical end, is wrong. There is a limit to any thing that exists, even a universe of however grand a scale. Each world is a being that exists in a bigger world or universe, and provides a home for lessor beings. To them, it is their world. To it, it is a single being in a greater world. When we broaded our minds to take in all that we can, when we contemplate the vastest reach of life that we can contain, we still embrace a universe that is highly impermanent. It is like the surface of a soap bubble, quickly to go away and be replaced by others. All of life is impermanet, at however deep a level, and we never reach the impermanent by going higher in scale of being, to bigger and bigger universes. Rather, we reach the impermanent by going into that part of our nature which is impermanent, our uppermost triad, principles eight, nine, and ten, the unmanifest parts of ourselves. Looking about us, we find ourselves contained by grand mysteries of life that embrace us. We do not sit in a empty, meaningless physical shell of dead, inert matter. We are surrounded by our true home and bodies and forms are merely a distraction. And we are no closer to our home regardless of what bodies on whatever plane may be the distraction. There is a mystery of life that is behind all things, and we are a part of it, regardless of where or what we are. And we have an equal right to realize and partake of it, no matter what our status is in the evolutionary scheme. Do it! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 14:23:54 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Globes and Planes It is very interesting to read all that is being said by 'fellow theosophists'! The activity of this discussion group has reached a level where I am having a tough time keeping up with everything that is being said. While I am still hoping to write to Jerry H-E separately (a message I should have written last week) on AAB, I'd like to toss a couple of additional questions on planes etc. : (a) I read somewhere that what happens on the physical plane is an 'effect' only; the causes of all physical plane manifestation lie deep on the Astral and or mental planes. For example, it is said that all disease happens on the mental or astral levels first (modern 'health practice' or medical science seems to be coming around to this view as well). Does it mean that I have already sent this message on the Astral, or (hopefully) Mental plane? Does this discussion group exist on the Mental plane, and what we are seeing everyday on our computer screens is simply an 'effect' of the discussion that we are having on the inner planes (perhaps during periods of our sleep)? (b) It is also said that our true nature is that of 'Dhyan Chohans' (physical, emotional. mental and egoic, buddhic and atmic bodies being transitory). I'd like to invite comments on the difference between a monad and a dhyan chohan, as a follow-up to a comment that Jerry S. made recently (thank you Jerry for this and other comments in response to my previous message). Are they not the same? Best Regards/Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 17:08:13 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: current subscribers I did a 'review' command for the four mailing lists, and found the following statistics: ---- Following is a breakout of the 'theos' mailing list subscribers as of 12/21/93. The total of 37 was reduced by one for someone who has quit ("darnick") and four duplicate accounts. (+)buds (+)news (+)buds (+)roots (+)news (+)buds (+)news --none-- -total - -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- (+)theos-l 26 1 0 1 1 29 (-)theos-l 1 0 1 1 n/a 3 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- total: 27 1 1 2 1 32 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 17:17:36 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: AAB Teaching Jerry H-E: Your wonderful and very scholarly analysis of various topics always comes as a source of great inspiration to me! It is a previlege to be able to communicate with you and all the other fellow members of this group. I have a number of comments/questions/quotations for you and frankly, I am not sure when I will be able to communicate all of them! My daughter has been on Christmas vacation and and my wife and I have been trying to enjoy her wonderful and blissful company to the fullest these last few days (I was reading somewhere that a relative, friend or even a person on the street can teach you a whole lot more than even a most profound book; relationships have been a weak area in my life but I am trying to overcome that by getting totally absorbed in the person(s) in whose company I find myself at any given time)! Anyways, let me begin by thanking you for taking the time out of your busy schedule and writing all those replies not only to my questions but also those of others. I am primarily going to quote from 'A treatise on Cosmic Fire' (TCF) by Alice Bailey to allow you (and others) to see what appears to me to be a continuity of teaching of the SD in TCF, in this message. Later on I'll try (perhaps in a follow-up message) a point by point response to your previous communications (if time permits). Everyone is right! This ( i.e. 'Everyone is right') by the way is the title of a wonderful book by Roland Peterson (a senior VP with a large high tech corporation in California) which shows the similarily of the teachings of all great religions of the world, including Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism. I am using this expression to mean that in my opinion, everyone (whether on this network or not) is right in holding on to his or her opinion about any particular subject or person, in accordance with his stage of evolutionary development! It is perfectly ok with me that Eldon considers Purucker to be the successor of HPB, and others may consider Besant or Leadbeater to be the successors of HPB. Throughout this entire exchange of messages on Alice Bailey teachings, my attempt has been to only show you and others on the network that you may be overlooking an important source of true theosophical teaching, that no true theosophist should be 'close-minded' to new revelation, and a teaching should not be dismissed out of hand just like that without any reason. I have upto this day NOT found anything that AAB has said that contradicts what HPB has written. Your clarification of the one sentence that I qouted in a previous message on the "Kalki Avatar" is entirely compatible with what I have learnt from the Blue books (I use 'blue' books to refer to 'Bailey' books). In ROC, AAB has said that the Christ will re-appear in three different ways: (a) Establishing of a semblance of Unity and Right human relations (b) Overshadowing of selected disciples and initiates. In DINA (I can give page reference if anyone is interested) AAB states that 'the Christ conducted an interesting experiment' with Krishnamurthy ... the experiment was not very successful due to the devotional nature of the persons surrounding him. My assumption is that K was for a while overshadowed by the Christ, and the 'experiment' was not successful because of the devotional nature of persons like Leadbeater and Besant (no criticism intended; I am myself a devotional type, in the process of making the change over to a 'mental' type!) It is said that when the Christ re-appears, hundreds of disciples/initiates will be overshadowed (so if you feel at times that you are being overshadowed by someOne, you may be right!!!) (c) The actual physical plane manifestation, in a physical body, by the Christ. I gather that this is supposed to happen by 2025. I am sorry for having misinterpreted HPB's sentence but am glad we have access to someone like you to explain the real meaning within the overall context of the teaching. By the way, I see that the instructions to the Esoteric Section (ES) are out in the open, or they appear to be anyways. You mentioned you liked Vol I of Parucker's instructions to ES... CAN I BUY THAT BOOK FROM YOU, and if so, PLEASE WRITE THE PRICE. Also, does HPB's Collected Writings contain all of her instructions to ES as well? I'd like to know if all instructions to ES are published and how I can buy them. I do have your address and will make the check out appropriately as soon as I finalize the order (which I am still holding in my hands until Clarice of our local theosophical group tells me what she has got for me). Also, Volume III of SD (which Daniel has shown was the original Vol III as written by HPB) ... is that available as Volume 5 (or is it 4 ) of one of the editions of SD, and do you have it for sale to me? While on the subject of books, I await your catalog on health and healing. You may be interested to know : (a) My wife is an RN and is in the business of sending nurses to hospitals/nursing homes for temporary staff relief (kind of like a 'Kelly girl' operation). I am very interested in this area of health and healing, matter of fact there are several esoteric healers in my circle of friends. (b) Are you familiar with the writings of Zachary Lansdowne (published by Samuel Weiser) ...'Ray Methods of Healing' and ' The Chakras and Esoteric Healing'? I met Mr. Lansdowne at a seminar last year ...a very humble person, works as a systems engineer for the Dept of Defence (I think) in Boston, and is part of the Boston Theosophical branch ( I am not sure if they are connected at all with TSA any more; he told me that all that they study is Alice Bailey and perhaps some HPB books). (c) I also subscribe to 2 'alternative' medicine newsltters, written by MDs; one of them is called 'Health and Healing' by Dr. Whitaker, and the other one is published in Ingram Texas and called 'Alternatives'. Before I begin quoting from TCF, let me close this part of my message by mentioning that we saw a wonderful movie the other day, "My Life" ... seems to be especially appropriate for those wanting to tread the path, for them, 'now is the time, today is the day of opportunity'... Quotes from 'A Treatise on Cosmic Fire' (TCF) by AAB ____________________________________________________ I have too much to quote from TCF but luckily you have a copy of it, so if I start running out of time, I may simply cite the page/paragraph number and skip the text. Read the Introduction (p. viii) by Foster Bailey, last paragraph:"In TCF, the Tibetan has given us what HPB prophesied he would give, namely the psychological key to the Cosmic Creation. HPB stated that in the 20th century a disciple would come who would give the psychological key to her own monumental work SD on which treatise the Tibetan worked with her; and AAB worked in complete recognition of her own task in this sequence." (I am going to use abbreviations in the quoatations to save time). This ref. was pointed out by Jim Meier of Houston (thanks, Jim). Notice that there is no reference given to any of HPB's writings in this paragraph. It is possible that HPB may have said this outside of her SD, in some aother publication. Please notice the following on p. viii first paragraph (echos of this paragraph have appeared on the net in messages of Brenda Tucker among others): "Spiritual teaching will be increasingly accepted as an hypothesis to be proved less by scholasticism, historical foundation and authority, and MORE BY THE RESULTS OF ITS EFFECT UPON THE LIFE LIVED AND ITS PRACTICAL USEFULNESS IN SOLVING THE PROBLEMS OF HUMANITY." Next turn to "Extract from a Statement by the Tibetan", read it fully, starting on p. x with "Nor will he make that desired contact until he has transmuted emotional devotion into unselfish service to humanity, __ not to the Master." .. TCF is dedicated to HPB, "that great disciple who lighted her torch in the East and brought the light to Europe and America in 1875". Refer to "Foreword" on p. xii, 2nd paragraph (this RELATES TO YOUR CONJECTURE REGARDING WHAT 'PSYCHOLOGY' MEANT AT THE TIME OF HPB or AAB, AS STATED IN YOUR RECENT MESSAGE TO BRENDA TUCKER ON PSYCHOLOGICAL KEY TO SD): "Secondly, to express that which is subjective in comprehensible terms, and to point out the next step forward in the understanding of the true psychology. It is an elucidation of the relation existing between Spirit and Matter, which relation demonstrates as consciousness. It will be found that the Treatise deals primarily with the aspect of mind, with consciousness and with the higher psychology, and less with matter as we know of it on the physical plane..." On p. xv1, it says that all references to SD are to the Third Revised Edition. Read the quotes on p.xvii on Fire and the Three Fires, they also provide useful page number references to SD. Note that several Stanzas of Dzyan are reproduced in TCF, including Seven Esoteric Stanzas (p.1229). I have not had the time to compare if these translations are the same as HPB's (they appear similar, at least as far as the language is concerned). The chapter on 'Introductory Postulates' p. 3, starts with, "The teaching which is given in this treatise on Cosmic Fire might be formulated in the following terms. These postulates are simply extensions of the three fundamentals to be found in the Proem in the first Volume of SD by HPB." It does not matter to me whether this is a psychological key to SD or what, it seems to me that all lovers of HPB's SD should be interested in what seems like a sequel to it (i.e. TCF). I am really at a loss to know why you have such a hard time verifying for yourself whether TCF is compatible with SD or not. You seem to have very thoroughly researched SD and it seems to me that you will be able to catch any 'hanky panky' material right away. What, my dear Sir, prevents you from quoting an incompataibility between TCF and SD, so we can put the issue of the 'genuineness' of AAB as a spiritual teacher to test? If it is mere lack of time, I can understand. But if it is that 'others say that AAB was a channeler' or something like that, you need to re-examine your position! This message has become quite long, and I need to get out to my family in a few minutes, so I will close this for now... May the thoughts which my soul creates reach and encourage you (and other readers of this message)! Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 21:40:11 -0500 From: HOBB@delphi.com Subject: Paul Johnson's book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS by Terry Hobbes, Boston, MA (hobb@delphi.com) In a recent message Mr. Johnson mentioned that his book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS would be published in a new edition by SUNY. Almost six months ago I bought a copy in a local used book store and read it from cover to cover. Soon after I saw Mr. Johnson's article on the Masters in the Summer issue of GNOSIS. I can't believe that more theosophical students have not publicly criticized his book especially his fanciful speculations on the Master K.H. and M. A friend of mine who lives in Tampa recently sent me a photocopy of Daniel Caldwell's TWO OPEN LETTER TO PAUL JOHNSON ON HIS BOOK IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS. Mr. Caldwell does a good job at showing the weakness of Johnson's speculation. Mr. Johnson ignores the testimony of numerous chelas who saw and talked with the Masters. I called my friend to ask where more copies of Caldwell's book can be purchased. He said a copy can be bought for $8.00 from --- Daniel Caldwell, Post Office Box 1844, Tuscon, Arizona 85702. Does anyone on the theosophical network know if Mr. Johnson has replied to Dan Caldwell's questions. I would like to see Johnson's answers. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 21:51:38 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Globes Eldon, your essay about the globes created a lot of questions in my mind, which you could, perhaps, help me with. I suspect at least part of my problems are semantics. I thought it would be easiest if I quoted you first, and then commented. Are you saying that consciousness is composite or an aggrate of the 7 principles? Could you perhaps mean self-consciousness here instead of what Eastern schools call "pure" consciousness? It seems to me that consciousness is more fundamental than the 7 principles (which only exist on this planetary chain. This is fine as long as we agree that all of these "monads" are mayavic. Are they not the manifestations of pure consciousness? Why does everyone always want to pick on the psychic realms as being illusionary? HPB taught that the astral was the most illusionary plane (serpents behind every flower, etc). And surely our everyday physical world is as illusive as anything can be. It seems to me that all four cosmic planes below the Abyss (ie those containing Globes A through G) are illusive and deceptive (which is what the word maya implies). I fear students may get the idea that *only* the psychic is illusive. I am confused by this paragraph. The first sentence seems to be saying what I said above, that the 7 principles are a reflection of consciousness. But the second sentence again implies that consciousness is a product of the 7 principles. I see no difference in this idea than the scientist who says that consciousness is the product of the brain. Although Kama and Kama-Manas are not bodies, nevertheless we do, in fact, have an astral body and a mental body. Of course, we can argue about what to call them. It is a fact (proven by individual experience throughout countless centuries) that we have a body that functions on each cosmic plane. You can call it anything you want to, or define it any way you want to. HPB clearly distinguishes principles from bodies, and allows for several subtle bodies including the "mayavi-rupa". I adopted the terms "astral body" and "mental body" from Besant/Leadbeater, whom I know that you do not especially endorse. Perhaps you can come up with better names? I think that the phrase "we can come into being" is somewhat misleading. We (or a part of us) already are existing on these globes. Your astral body (call it what you will) resides, right now on the astral plane in either Globe C or Globe E or somewhere along their connecting path. It can be nowhere else any more than your physical body can ever be anywhere else than on the physical plane. Each plane is a Ring-Pass-Not for its corresponding body. I am somewhat lost on this whole paragraph. Somehow, what you are trying to say is not coming through to me. How can each globe possibly be composed of Astral Light? Do you have a reference for this? The astral light of the Qabalists was said to contain Yesod, the 9th Sephiroth, which is located between the physical and astral planes - probably on what is often called the etheric plane. The astral light exists only in regard to our physical Earth, Globe D. Each globe does have its own higher atmosphere which corresponds to our astral light (as above so below). Perhaps this is what you mean here? I am not sure, but I think that Besant & Leadbeater do use the term "mental matter" as well as "astral matter." These seem as good as anything else to me, but maybe you have better names? If I understand you right, I agree with what you seem to be saying, because when located on the mental plane in a mental body (or whatever you call it) you can still think thoughts, and those thoughts are not experienced the same as bodies and "things." In this sense, the term "mental matter" can be confusing. I would certainly agree with this paragraph. The first two sentences here are clear, but you lost me in the last sentence. It seems to me that without physical eyes, we could not "look out into space" at all (?). This is only true with those planes that contain form (rupa, as opposed to arupa). I think that this paragraph illustrates one of the problem that today's theosophists are faced with - the over-abundance of names and terms. Where are principles separate from bodies? Earlier you said, "Anywhere that we man manifest our consciousness, where we can come into being, we clothe ourselves in the seven principles." Now are you saying that we can get by with less than seven? Earlier you said that Kama-Manas was not a body. Just exactly how does one go about separating his or her principles anyway? Shifting consciousness through the subtle bodies is a well-known magical practice, but can we do this with principles too? I cannot agree with your first sentence. I believe that when we leave our physical body behind, we take on one of our subtle bodies (the duality of body-consciousness remains with us). The astral and mental bodies do have a "personal form." In fact, I suspect that many who die take awhile to even realize that they are dead. The business of seeing our own projected surroundings occurs in Devachan, not in Kamaloka which most of us will pass through quickly with only a quasi-awareness of what is happening. I also disagree with the idea that we will be in a "subjective state of existence" if you mean that somehow we will lose all sense of objectivity. We are always in a condition with a subjective self experiencing an objective world, all the way up to Globe D-prime, where duality first starts. When we dream, we still retain a subjective sense of identity looking out at an objective world, albeit a psychic projection. The only real difference between dream and death is the cutting of the "silver cord" or sutratma. Also, we do act in dreams. I don't think that we have to worry about being in a state of being as opposed to a state of action until after we cross the Abyss because there is no doing in the spiritual worlds, as we conceive of it. You lost me here. I thought you said earlier that we visit in bodies, not principles(?). A Devachanee will be focused in a mental body (the astral and physical having been dropped) but will still have all 7 principles; isn't this what you said earlier as well as in several other articles? We will grow "a fully developed personality" on the other globes as our lifewave passes through them as we slowly progress up the Arc of Ascent. True. We will not evolve a Globe E personality for a few more millions of years. I think that this paragraph needs to be better defined. I am not sure what you want to say here. Who is the "we" who exists on a globe? This is an interesting concept, but according to HPB's figure on page 200 of SD Vol I, the globes each relate to one of the Sephiroth, and no one has every tried to suggest that they be united or paired together into one globe. Although this is in accordance with the teachings, I doubt that it happens very often. Our physical plane is the lowest in our *system*, but there are other systems. Here again, I am at a loss. It is my understanding that Kamaloka is a purgative state that we go through after death - it takes place on the astral plane between Globes C and E in order to allow our consciousness (at the so-called Second Death) to rise up to Globes B and F on the mental plane and into Devachan. I am not aware of any theosophist ever stating that Kamaloka is on Globe D. The name itself means "desire world" and thus is an apt term for the astral plane. Another thing that bothers me is, what is a "Globe D personality?" The personality is formed on the mental plane and never (that I know of) manifests on Globe D which is on the physical plane. Do you mean the personality of human beings now undergoing reincarnation on Globe D? I cannot agree with this. Even after we lose our physical body, nevertheless we can affect living people through our thoughts and desires. What about the Nirmanakaya? The whole intent of the Nirmanakaya teaching is that the disembodied can still effect (for good or ill) the embodied. I also believe that the disembodied can meet and converse with the living while the living are asleep or in trance, for a time. It is only after the disembodied go into Devachan, that such converse becomes impossible. I think that HPB is pretty clear that we only enter Kamaloka after death. At death we lose our physical body and thus leave the physical plane altogether. However, we can experience what the Kamaloka is like while living in our physical body, through meditation. When we depart the physical body, we visit another world. Period. A dream is just such a visitation. What else could it be? There is no difference between a dream and an astral traveling experience except that we generally have little control over our dreams, while we are more conscious during astral traveling. Both involve shifting consciousness to the astral body. The "contents of our own consciousness" exist only on the inner subtle planes - not on the physical plane. I have to disagree with this as it is written. It not only is possible to "have existences" on other planes, but it is impossible not to have such existences. We have to go to sleep sometime. Everyone does. Sleep itself is nothing more than shifting the focus of consciousness to another plane. Every one of us has existences on other planes all the time. The trick is to be aware of it, and to be able to consciously control it. I think you mean "have conscious existences." It seems to me that the problem I am having is in how we define the term "exist." We all "exist" on all of the planes and globes. I have a hard time with this paragraph. Again, I am not sure about what "exists" means. How is our spiritual progress "hindered" by accumulating information and experience? How does one "shut down the psychical side of life?" Does this imply that we must stop thinking? While I certainly agree with the last part, I question whether anyone can separate concsiousness from sense perception because consciousness can focus on any plane with senses corresponding to that plane. Thats enough of this for now. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 01:20:51 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: answer on keys This is by Brenda Tucker. Dear Jerry (and anyone interested): In short, I admit that when I wrote yesterday, I made comments on your listing of seven keys without noticing that you included references after each one. I since then saw that you had listed references and withdraw my comments about you not being exact enough. I've never approached the study of THE SECRET DOCTRINE before from the vantage of the seven keys and think it could be elucidating. Although, the psychological reference I found can not mean the psychology of today (unless H.P.B. was writing for the future generations), there is still a great deal of interest in ASTROLOGY and its use and function as a tool to understanding the personality and makeup of man. And the reference did equate psychological to astronomical (and metaphysical to physical, which is like saying spirit to matter). I would look to placing any psychological understanding within the framework of the sixth key. Do you include metaphysical in the seventh? The quote you use in the sixth or astronomical key refers to a visible and invisible nature, which can be complimented by psychological study. I had no awareness of the meaning of the metrological key, but after what you wrote I checked the references in the index and came up with a rudimentary understanding of it. Measuring is aided by Geometry and the quote you use about the desecrating of the Bible by Jews so man didn't have an understanding of the sexual or earthly mysteries (which were just too difficult for the Hebrew constitution as I elaborate later), is an attempt to just affirm what you say in General Mention about the Hebrews having the lower keys. (Did the Jews remove geometry from the Bible? I don't remember much geometry in it.) So I think psychology's fascination with sex life i.e., phallicism, IS also relevant to this numerical key of the Hebrews and the Kabbalah even though the circle and line aren't used to cross each other in numerical parlance. The Kabbalah they were able to preserve as its interest lied in other mysteries, but the Bible contained too much that made him feel desecration of God. I would say that if you can penetrate beyond the geometrical in the Bible to the metrological (I do remember finding measurements in the Bible) then you can discover a theogonic key as well. Why is theogonic mystical? Theogony meaning cosmological? Phallic worship has developed only with the gradual loss of the keys to the inner meaning of religious symbols; "The Rabbi, having interpreted the symbol to suit his own tendencies, had to veil the crude significance; and this served a double purpose - that of keeping his secret to himself and of exalting himself in his supposed monotheism over the heathen, whom his Law commanded him to hate. (Vol II p.471) (Reminding me somewhat of the frequent reference to the infidel in Islamic literature.) With Geometry being a "key to the correct Bible reading," and the history of man being a bible topic, isn't the use of geometric symbols in the point, circle, line, cross, swastika, a use of the geometrical key in describing historical man? I think psychology must have to do with all four lower keys. THE SECRET DOCTRINE states there is a reason that the Hebrew keys are lower and the Aryan Hindu (or Eastern Occultist) complete with all seven keys. "The Hindu is nearly one million years old; the Semite Hebrew one of the latest small sub-races being some 8.000 years old and no more." (Vol II p.470-471) If you would like to read Carlyle's wise words to both these nations, they are on p. 470. There's one other quote I'd like to mention from Volume II. "Now, the Secret Doctrine furnishes a key which reveals to us on indisputable grounds of comparative analogy that Garuda .... is the origin of all other such allegories" and the emblem of time- p.564 and on p.565, the following: "...can be unriddled only by the primeval and original Occultism of Aryavarta brought into India by the primeval Brahmans, who had been initiated in Central Asia. And this is the Occultism we study and try to explain, as much as is possible in these pages. When the seven "thunders," or "sounds," or "vowels" "had uttered their voices" - but had forbidden the Seer to write them, and made him "seal up those things" The Angel "standing upon the sea and upon the earth" "and sware by him that liveth forever and ever... that there should be time no longer." (Jokingly, I can't keep quiet any longer! Pralaya sets in.) It sounds like the key to THE SECRET DOCTRINE is the adept's participation in man's evolution down through the ages. "The Logos of God is the revealer of man, and the logos (the Verbum) of man is the revealer of God," says Eliphas Levi in one of his paradoxes. To this, the Eastern Occultist would reply: " On this condition, however, that man should be dumb on the cause that produced both God and its Logos. Otherwise, he becomes invariably the reviler, not the revealer, of the incognizable Deity."" (Vol II, p. 589) I'm glad there's a chance for man to communicate this -- in the form of pralaya. Don't worry about answering this until your paper is done. I'm not in any hurry. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 03:55:10 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: AAB and HPB, and Keys Arvind, Yes, I agree with you, children and family are more important than anything that goes on here. I will also be seeing my daughter in a couple of days. She is twenty, and lives in Los Angeles. I only get to see her only once or twice a year, so I can especially appreciate how fortunate you are to be able to spend time with your family. Your comment that "everyone is right" concerning their views on successorship is curious, though I agree with it. I believe that everyone holds to the very belief system that they need at this time in their lives. As to my own point of view concerning successorship, I don't particularly care one way or the other. I'm just a student and a historian with no loyalties--even to H.P.B., if you get right down to it. My affection for H.P.B. comes from her position that theosophists are seekers of truth-- not doctrine. But I have met very few people into Theosophy who genuinely take this position. Most commonly I find people loyal to this or that Society, or this or that teacher. As Brenda Tucker pointed out, H.P.B. never intended us to accept her teachings on blind faith. Even in the Mahatma Letters, the masters point out that their chelas are not expected to follow orders without question. Yet most people I have met in this movement gravitate more towards C.W. Leadbeater's clarion call in 1910, when he said that theosophists loyal to the cause should be like soldiers, following every wish of the Masters without question. What a contrast to the message in the Mahatma's own letters! As far as the issue of successorship goes, every theosophical organization has claimed some sort of successorship to H.P.B., with the exception of the United Lodge of Theosophists, who argue that the whole issue of successorship was a lot of bunk in the first place. Actually, I think they have some pretty convincing arguments for their position. So as you see, in many ways, I'm a pretty lone wolf. The number of people I know in this movement who are in harmony with my view point, I can count on the fingers of one hand. But I have also out lasted most people in this movement. I have been with it for thirty years, and have seen a lot of pathology in all of the Organizations, and seen a lot of people come and go. 99 percent of those who were in this movement when I joined are either dead or they quit years ago. You say that your "attempt" has been to show myself and others that we may be overlooking an important source of true theosophical teaching, and that "no theosophist should be `closed minded' to new revelation..." From my point of view there was no *old* "revelation" in the first place. But I won't pursue this right now, because your definition of "revelation" may be very different from mine. As for open mindedness, I must point out to you that I know many members in the Adyar Society who consider me "very narrow," because I don't share their views. Over the past thirty years, I have studied the teachings of Blavatsky, Besant, Leadbeater, Purucker, Judge, Steiner etc. I have closely read Bailey's Autobiography and read part of ESOTERIC ASTROLOGY. Eventually, I will get through a large part, if not all of Bailey's writings. I will make a prediction however, that is based upon passed experience: Whatever conclusions I come to, they will probably be different from yours. Will that mean that I am closed minded? Regarding your comments on the Christ, please give references. I am particularly interested in the one pertaining to Krishnamurti. Purucker's E.S. teaching are in twelve volumes. $7.00 per volume, $72.00 for the set. Blavatsky's E.S. Instructions are included in Vol. 12 of her collected writings, $21.95. Daniel has shown that Vol. III of the S.D. *contained* manuscript material that would have made up volume III of the S.D. What would have been added to this manuscript, or what changes she would have made if she had lived is anybody's guess. This is out of print, but I have one copy of this left in paperback, (but is a little bumped up, otherwise new) that you can have for $8.75 (the original price). The catalogue on Health and Healing is delayed until the first of the year. Regarding quotes: I don't mind if you just give an abstract and citation. I don't know about how others feel. Now to respond to your "quotes": 1. p. viii. Re. HPB's "prophesy." As you say, he gives no reference. After over twenty years of reading Blavatsky, I have never seen this, and since I pay close attention to prophesy, I'm sure I would have remembered it. Where did she write this? Without reference to this "prophesy," Blavatsky's statement as cited by Brenda, can just as easily be read as having nothing to do with Bailey's work. In fact, I could argue that Brenda's quote can fit Purucker's works quite well. 2. p. xii. I made no conjecture regarding what psychology meant at the time of HPB or AAB, in my message to Brenda Tucker. I said that "Psychology in the 1880's was associated with hypnotism, and was unknown in ancient times, except as a form of magic." This is not "conjecture" but information you can find in any standard book dealing with the history of the psychoanalytic movement. The quote you give here defines psychology as: "an elucidation of the relation existing between spirit and matter, which relation demonstrates as consciousness." However Bailey wants to define psychology is OK with me. But this is not the understanding of the word in the 1880's, and is not how H.P.B. uses the term. For "consciousness," HPB uses the term "consciousness." For "psychology" HPB uses the term "psychology." Can you show me a quote from HPB that does otherwise? For consciousness, HPB refers to that as an aspect of the second part of the triple evolutionary scheme. See the SD vol. I p. 181, second full paragraph etc. Therefore, I amend my last statement that "HPB did not have a psychological key" to: H.P.B. did not have a psychological key either according to the standard definition of psychology during her time, or to the definition given on page xii of TCF. I will hold this position, until someone finds a quote where HPB cites a psychological key, or shows that this psychological key is another term for one of the keys she has given. I'm still patiently waiting. 3. p xvi. The third revised Edition was published in 1893, two years after H.P.B.'s death. As I had pointed out earlier, some U.L.T. students counted over 10,000 changes in this edition from the one published by HPB. Is the use of this edition an endorsement to the correctness of these changes? Does the use of this edition imply that this edition is superior to the original? 4. p xvii. I have read the quotes as you suggested. You wrote: I am really at a loss to know why you have such a hard time verifying for yourself whether TCF is compatible with SD or not. You seem to have very thoroughly researched SD and it seems to me that you will be able to catch any 'hanky panky' material right away. What, my dear Sir, prevents you from quoting an incompataibility between TCF and SD, so we can put the issue of the 'genuineness' of AAB as a spiritual teacher to test? If it is mere lack of time, I can understand. But if it is that 'others say that AAB was a channeler' or something like that, you need to re-examine your position! I'm afraid that you have confused me here. This was the first time I was aware that you wanted me to quote an "incompatability between TCF and SD." Since I have never read TCF, how could I quote such an incompatability? I never had any intention of searching for any incompatibilities to quote to you in the first place. I have better things to do with my time. My purpose was to compare the works of AAB with those of HPB. I am well read on HPB and have read a little of AAB. You are well read on AAB and have read a little of HPB. Therefore, I thought we would be able to explore these writings together, using each other's area of expertise. I suggest you re-read my earliest messages to you where I had proposed this collaborative study in the first place. From your above statement, my guess is that you are coming from the assumption that HPB and AAB's writing are compatible, and further, my guess is that you are also assuming that I am assuming that they are not. Since I never declared such an assumption (and frankly I don't really care whether they turn out to be compatible or incompatible), I think you are being unfair to me. I also don't recall writing that I wanted to put AAB's genuineness "as a spiritual leader" to a test. How does comparing AAB to HPB test AAB as a spiritual leader? Obviously she is a spiritual leader, because she has followers who regard her as a spiritual leader. Are you suggesting that AAB's genuineness as a spiritual leader depends upon HPB? What if HPB was found not to be genuine? Then what happens to AAB? Perhaps you need to clarify what you mean. Whether or not AAB was a "channeler" is another question, which I also never raised. In fact, I'm not sure as to what you mean by "channeler." I assume you are referring to how she got her information. If you mean something different, you will need to clarify. As I recall, Bailey discussed how she got her information in her Autobiography, and I had taken her description, like everything else, at face value. Are you suggesting that I was wrong in doing this? My understanding of this dialogue, is that we are comparing the works of these two writers. Presently, we are trying to solve this issue concerning the "psychological key" and the prophesy in TCF that HPB prophesied that someone would write a "psychological key" to the SD. I'm being perfectly straight forward with you when I say that I have never read such a prophesy. If it exists, I want to see the reference. If HPB named a psychological key, I want to see that reference too. If we find these references, our understanding of both HPB and AAB will be enriched. If we find that they don't exist, then we will be enriched by that too. It is a win-win situation. Brenda Tucker I found your message just as I was ready to upload the above and go to bed. You are right, to answer everything you brought up will take another seven pages of writing and I will never get my paper done. But I want to quickly clarify a couple of things you raised about the keys: The seven keys can be used to interpret every symbol and allegory. Though the Hebrews only had the lower keys, the Bible can still be interpreted from all seven keys. I don't think the astronomical aspect refers to astrology as we understand it, but they are related. Though H.P.B. isn't very specific in the quote you found as to how the keys may work from the psychological or astronomical aspect, and which from the physical or metaphysical, she does give some examples in the body of the book, that can be used as a guide. The psychological aspect, as she demonstrated in Isis Unveiled, fits well in giving meaning to the physical key. She gave an example in vol. II p. 63 (though she doesn't label it as an example) of an astronomical key interpreted from an astronomical aspect, so we can see how this works. The metaphysical aspect isn't a key either, but could work with the physical key, the geometric key, and I think the astronomical in some cases. The thing with the aspects, is that they really don't belong to any keys, they are just different ways of looking at allegories and symbols when looking at the same through one key or another. In other words, you might look at the allegory of the war in heaven according to the astronomical key, and find a psychological aspect to this interpretation. Take for example the symbol "gold." From an astro-chemical key (depending upon its context in an allegory) this symbol may indicate spiritual purity. But looking at this same symbol, in context with the allegory, you might note that looking at it from the psychological aspect, you might find that psychological wholeness fits this allegory. Or from an astronomical aspect, you might find a hidden reference to the sun. I hope this is more illuminating than confusing. If I confused you, let me know, and I will try again with the more concrete example of an actual allegory. You might be right about the psychological aspect having to do with all four lower keys. I'll have to think that one through. But the most important point here, is that the relationship of the aspects to the keys is contextual, not rigid. An aspect may work with one key in one allegory, but not work with the same key in another allegory. Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 10:35:34 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the principles, planes, and bodies Jerry S: Following are some comments on your questions regarding what I've written. Some differences may be due to terminology, many, though, are due to our perhaps having different cosmological models of the nature of how the globes, planes, principles, and monads all fit together. There are a few points that I did not have a chance to get in this time, but will mention in another message. It's good to be challenged to write our understanding as clearly as we can. And we don't have to agree. We do have a responsibility to teach what we've been given, to share with others, to pass on what we've learned. Apart from our individual expressions, it's quite possible that a chela would be taught something entirely different that what either of us think. We still, though, have a responsibility to pass on what we've been given, what we've been fortunate enought to be permitted to know, as our own contributions to the thought of the world. The only restrictions would come when are lips are sealed by the Mysteries, when we've been given teachings in confidence rather than having explored them ourselves. In the former case, it is our own individual karma, rather than our teacher's and school's karma, that is involved, so we can do so at our own discretion. In the later case, we must remain silent. ---- Consciousness *is* the seven or ten principles. They consist of the names or descriptions of the coming into being of a life, and the successive veils of selfhood acquired down and through actually having a form of some sort. All the principles are needed to be fully manifest on a plane. On any plane, all the principles are required in order to have a form and exist and be fully functional. The only exception to the requirement that all the principles are needed is the physical body itself, the Sthula Sharira, which is a mere containing shell. It is possible to exist without it, if one is sufficiently developed, where one exists as a Nirmanakaya, having full sensory connection to the world but not required to live in and through an animal form, which is what the human body is, apart from the indwelling human being. On formless planes, the requirement to have a particular body, and for all the affects of one's life energy to only come out through it, is gone. We can exist without having to have a body that we can say "this is me" about. We can affect the environment directly. But this does not necessarily mean that there are no forms, no objects, no objectivity to the Sthula Sharira or physical principle of those planes. The principles are not bodies. On a plane we have a body if we have all the principles, down to and including the lowest, the "body" principle. The principles are the fabric of consciousness, and not bodies. Consciousness is not the action of bodies on differing planes, but rather exists in its own right. Without physical eyes, for instance, we can have the consciousness of *seeing* of a distant star; we gaze upon a star in our consciousness of sense perception, with or without the physical eyes providing the sensory input. In a world of forms, we need a body with eyes to see, in a formless world, we can see without that body as a proxy for our consciousness, we see directly. Although the principles are each separate aspects of the manifesting or giving expression to consciousness on a plane, unfolding one from the next until the actual form or body is produced, it is not required that we fully come into active existence on a plane. We do not have to participate in a world, and take on a form, and interact with beings thereon, in order to experience the nature of *being* on that world. We can clothe ourselves in just the higher principles, and not fully manifest ourselves. Functioning as the higher triad, we have a sense of existing, and of being interrelated with life, of participation in the creation of the world, and a sense of personal egoity or individual identity. As the higher triad alone, we experience a sense of pure self that is without desire nor thought related to the happenings thereon, but is absorbed in individuality. A further clothing of ourselves includes Kama, where we are concerned with the activities of the world, but have not taken on the necessary life energies (Prana), sensory connection (Linga-Sharira), nor physical form (Sthula Sharira) to engage in activity thereon. Someone in devachan, for instance, would be clothed in Atman, Buddhi, and Buddhi-Manas, but would have dropped the lower principles. He would exist apart from any connection with the globe on which he was withdrawing from, and would continue in that state, clothed in but the higher principles, as he passed through the other globes, before returning to his next life on earth. No longer having all seven principles on this globe, and not taking on all seven principles on any of the subsequent globes, he would not participate in the activities of those globes, but rather be in a dream-like state. He takes on no desire to have activity, nor life energies to affect the outer world, nor a form to act through, but rather is a silent visitor to the globe, unseen and not interacted with by the dwellers thereon. Even earlier than devachan, he looses his power to affect the outer world upon the death and dissolution of the vital-astral-physical nature--particularly when Prana is gone. He can only, with but few exceptions, affect us if he is awakened from his sleep by a medium, whom lends him life energies and allows him to engender new karma. At death we loose our physical body, but we do not immediately find ourselves in a body on Globe E. The after-death states involve the letting go of our seven principles for Globe D before we move on to clothe ourselves in some, but not all, principles on Globe E. In devachan, as we continue the state from Globe D to the other globes, we do not take on all seven principles on the other globes. Where we to do so, we would not be in devachan anymore, but would find ourselves in full embodiement, including a physical form and the ability to interact with others and make new karma. When we die, the physical body goes, but we are still on Globe D. We are here until we have let go of all of our skandhas, until all of our principles have returned to the elements, and we had freed ourselves to clothe our consciousness in the fabric of consciousness of the next globe. This thought may be difficult to follow until we free ourselves from the association of principles and bodies. The principles are not bodies on different planes, and Manas, for instance, is not literally a physical form on just a higher plane of being. The principles are the aspects of consciousness that we clothe ourselves in, not coats of matter or bodies on a number of planes. We may have a globe on the mental plane, where the nature of existence thereon is most responsive to Manas, but the bodies on that globe are not Manas itself. The nature of existence, the laws of nature, the way that things work is particularly sensitive to Manas, but the matter of that world is not Manas itself. And we must keep clear the distinction between planes and globes. The globes are the places where existence can happen, whereas the planes are the spaces of space, the broad spectrum of consciousness that contain and create those worlds. A plane is not a world or globe. For each globe that we visit, we have a unique aspect of ourselves that we've evolved forth. This is carried with us in our consciousness and also inhers in our skandhas for each respective globe, which we draw to us as we clothe ourselves in the principles for that globe. Who and what we are is a difficult subject, because it is not just us, Human Monads, that come together to form our constitution when we come into embodied life. There is a whole family of Monads, from the Divine, Spiritual, down through the Beast and yet lower. These different Monads are a form of our own personal experience, or a different way of describing the seven principles. They are distinct beings in their own right, each as unique, distinct, and individual as we, the Human Monads, are. There are a number of mysteries associated with the interaction of these Monads, including how animals enter the human kingdom, what happens at initiation, and how humans enter the Dhyani-Chohanic kingdom. There are some good hints but not a lot directly written about these various subjects. In our study of Theosophy, we have to be able to restructure our framework of ideas a number of times. Each time we come to a deeper understanding of things. The most-apparent meanings and views that we first get from our studies are the first to go. There is not a final view that is the most correct, since there would be still be greater understandings to come. Approaching the study with an open mind, with reverence for the Teachings, with a willingness to stay true to what we have learned yet to dare to explore uncharted waters, we will find no end or final stopping point to what we can behold. The only limit is our willingness to move forward, to grow and expand in our approach to the Teachings! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:02:10 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Paul Johnson's book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS This is the first knowledge I have of Mr. Caldwell's intent to distribute "open letters"-- not very open on his part to conceal that this was happening. I have answered him in private and hope it will remain so. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 12:09:42 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Paul's book, seven keys Hi Jerry-- Could you clarify what you mean by "compilation." Since I already have some material written on most of the characters, and permissions are a real challenge, it seemed simpler to go ahead and do a whole book rather than collect other people's work. But I could see a book of collective authorship if others would write individual segments. SUNY's opinion on this is crucial to any such plan. As to AB, CWL etc. I have decided to include them but restrict focus on initiatory contacts to the period prior to 1907. Olcott's presidency will provide the time frame under consideration, so I will briefly describe the subsequent careers of the chelas but won't focus on the issues that arose after 1907. Does this sound reasonable as a principle of inclusion? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:10:59 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Paul Johnson's book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS According to HOBB@delphi.com: > > > From: Terry Hobbes, Boston, MA (hobb@delphi.com) > > > In a recent message Mr. Johnson mentioned that his book IN > SEARCH OF THE MASTERS would be published in a new edition by SUNY. > Almost six months ago I bought a copy in a local used book store and > read it from cover to cover. Soon after I saw Mr. Johnson's article > on the Masters in the Summer issue of GNOSIS. I can't believe that > more theosophical students have not publicly criticized his book > especially his fanciful speculations on the Master K.H. and M. A > friend of mine who lives in Tampa recently sent me a photocopy of > Daniel Caldwell's TWO OPEN LETTER TO PAUL JOHNSON ON HIS BOOK IN > SEARCH OF THE MASTERS. Mr. Caldwell does a good job at showing the > weakness of Johnson's speculation. Mr. Johnson ignores the testimony > of numerous chelas who saw and talked with the Masters. I called my > friend to ask where more copies of Caldwell's book can be purchased. > He said a copy can be bought for $8.00 from Daniel Caldwell, Post > Office Box 1844, Tuscon, Arizona 85702. Does anyone on the > theosophical network know if Mr. Johnson has replied to Dan > Caldwell's questions. I would like to see Johnson's answers. My first posting was done immediately after the shock of discovering that Mr. Caldwell was selling "Open Letters" to me without my knowledge. His April letter, filled with objections to In Search of the Masters, was mailed to several other people, along with a photocopy of my earlier letter to him which he distributed without my foreknowledge or approval. I sent him a reply, but specifically requested that our future correspondence must be private. He never answered until last month, at which time he sent further objections, without any mention of intent to publicly distribute them. I replied, and am now left wondering what may become of the two letters I sent Mr. Caldwell. To avoid making a personal attack, all I can add is that I feel I have been dishonorably treated, and will make no further response to Mr. Caldwell's criticisms of In Search of the Masters. The Masteres Revealed, however, is not in fact a reprint of ISM but a new book, only half as long, presenting 32 Master figures 12 of whom are new discoveries. The introduction is a revision of the Gnosis article mentioned above, and book 3 includes a treasure trove of secret government documents revealing new facts about British suspicions of HPB's political sympathies. I will gladly respond to criticisms of The Masters Revealed if they appear in the guise of reviews or letters published in periodicals. It is far less speculative and more persuasive than the first book, and should suffice to show the extent to which new research has led me to revise many elements of the interpretation of HPB and the Masters in ISM. Particularly clearcut is the change in position regarding Tibet. TMR shows beyond a doubt that the TS had genuine access to legitimate Tibetan scriptures through a sponsor in Shigatse. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 13:25:30 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: ISM & TMR Hi Paul, Where can one get a copy of TMR or your other books ... is there a phone number for the publishers? Can I get a copy via mail order or must I take a trip to a bookstore? Thanks/Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 14:02:47 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: ISM & TMR Dear Arvind, SUNY Press books are sold by an 800 number which I will post when the book comes out this summer. ISM can be bought from me at $13.95 postpaid, 152 Benefield St., Danville, VA 24540. Thanks for your interest. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 16:18:27 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Happy Holidays I know that several of us are going to be absent from these discussions for a while due to holidays so before I begin my 'quick response to Jerry H-E, let me take this opportunity to wish all on this network Season's Greetings, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year! LET THE FORCES OF LIGHT BRING ILLUMINATION TO ALL MANKIND LET THE SPIRIT OF PEACE BE SPREAD ABROAD MAY MEN OF GOODWILL EVERYWHERE MEET IN A SPIRIT OF COOPERATION MAY FOREGIVENESS ON THE PART OF ALL MEN BE THE KEYNOTE AT THIS TIME LET POWER ATTEND THE EFFORTS OF THE GREAT ONES SO LET IT BE AND HELP US TO DO OUTR PART! (The Great Invocation, first stanza) I'll be back next Monday. Happy Holidays to all/Arvind Quick Response to Jerry H-E ___________________________ Jerry H-E, Let me begin by apologizing for perhaps going beyond the 'norms of brotherly behaviour' in my previous message where towards the end I became somewhat accusatory in the statements that you have cited regarding why you have not already read TCF etc....In hindsight, I should have re-worded it completely; you are completely correct that it is a win-win situation for all concerned. Other comments within your message below. Best Regards/Arvind > As far as the issue of successorship goes, every > theosophical organization has claimed some sort of successorship > to H.P.B., with the exception of the United Lodge of > Theosophists, who argue that the whole issue of successorship was > a lot of bunk in the first place. Actually, I think they have > some pretty convincing arguments for their position. The issue of successorship is of little interest on its own, but I do want to let you know that AAB was the 'route' (I do not want to use the word 'medium') through which Hierarchy/DK gave the second installment of the 'teaching', the third installment will come in early 20th century, the first installment came through HPB, according to the info in the blue books. In our small ways each one of us is a 'successor' to HPB if we try to follow her injunction to look for the truth. BTW, DK (and not AAB) is said to be the disciple that HPB had supposedly prophesied would come in the 20th century to expand on Gupta Vidya etc... > So as you see, in many ways, I'm a pretty lone wolf. The > number of people I know in this movement who are in harmony with > my view point, I can count on the fingers of one hand. But I > have also out lasted most people in this movement. I have been > with it for thirty years, and have seen a lot of pathology in all > of the Organizations, and seen a lot of people come and go. 99 > percent of those who were in this movement when I joined are > either dead or they quit years ago. I am very pleased to know that you have been in this 'movement' for so many years. I am very much of a newcomer, having found out about Bailey/theosophy only less than 5 years ago. Yes, it is true, most organizations tend to grow old and 'crystallized' in their thinking; hence the emphasis by K on on leaving any religious type of organization behind... > You say that your "attempt" has been to show myself and > others that we may be overlooking an important source of true > theosophical teaching, and that "no theosophist should be `closed > minded' to new revelation..." From my point of view there was > no *old* "revelation" in the first place. But I won't pursue > this right now, because your definition of "revelation" may be > very different from mine. As for open mindedness, I must point > out to you that I know many members in the Adyar Society who > consider me "very narrow," because I don't share their views. > Over the past thirty years, I have studied the teachings of > Blavatsky, Besant, Leadbeater, Purucker, Judge, Steiner etc. I > have closely read Bailey's Autobiography and read part of > ESOTERIC ASTROLOGY. Eventually, I will get through a large part, > if not all of Bailey's writings. I will make a prediction > however, that is based upon passed experience: Whatever > conclusions I come to, they will probably be different from > yours. Will that mean that I am closed minded? I do not think that your view is 'narrow-minded' at all (those who call you narrow-minded are no doubt narrow-minded themselves, due to what I call the law of reflection: 'what you see in others is a reflection of yourself'!) I agree with you that no two persons will reach same conclusions after reading the same material...hidden in this is perhaps another law," no two snow-flakes (what to speak of human beings) are alike"! > Regarding your comments on the Christ, please give > references. I am particularly interested in the one pertaining to > Krishnamurti. It is a brief pragraph in DINA, which I will point out hopefully on Monday. I do not have the blue books with me here at the office but you can look under index in Discipleship in the New Age, and hopefully K's name will be there (otherwise I'll give the ref on Monday anyways). > Purucker's E.S. teaching are in twelve volumes. $7.00 per > volume, $72.00 for the set. Blavatsky's E.S. Instructions are > included in Vol. 12 of her collected writings, $21.95. Daniel > has shown that Vol. III of the S.D. *contained* manuscript > material that would have made up volume III of the S.D. What > would have been added to this manuscript, or what changes she > would have made if she had lived is anybody's guess. This is out > of print, but I have one copy of this left in paperback, (but is > a little bumped up, otherwise new) that you can have for $8.75 > (the original price). The catalogue on Health and Healing is > delayed until the first of the year. I hope to send you a check for at least these books over the holidays, thanks. > Regarding quotes: I don't mind if you just give an abstract > and citation. I don't know about how others feel. > > Now to respond to your "quotes": > > 1. p. viii. Re. HPB's "prophesy." As you say, he gives no > reference. After over twenty years of reading Blavatsky, I have > never seen this, and since I pay close attention to prophesy, I'm > sure I would have remembered it. Where did she write this? > Without reference to this "prophesy," Blavatsky's statement as > cited by Brenda, can just as easily be read as having nothing to > do with Bailey's work. In fact, I could argue that Brenda's > quote can fit Purucker's works quite well. That is ok with me for now. > 2. p. xii. I made no conjecture regarding what psychology meant > at the time of HPB or AAB, in my message to Brenda Tucker. I > said that "Psychology in the 1880's was associated with > hypnotism, and was unknown in ancient times, except as a form of > magic." This is not "conjecture" but information you can find in > any standard book dealing with the history of the psychoanalytic > movement. The quote you give here defines psychology as: > > "an elucidation of the relation existing between spirit and > matter, which relation demonstrates as consciousness." > > However Bailey wants to define psychology is OK with me. > But this is not the understanding of the word in the 1880's, and > is not how H.P.B. uses the term. For "consciousness," HPB uses > the term "consciousness." For "psychology" HPB uses the term > "psychology." Can you show me a quote from HPB that does > otherwise? Not right now, and again, it is not so important as the fact that AAB has presented TCF as an 'expansion' or a sequel with more info along the same lines as given in SD, so all students of SD should be interested in investigating whether there indeed is new info, and if so, what that info is. This is my opinion! Hopefully, we both can take a few sections each of TCF and agree to study them and point out what the differences are if any, with SD. Even though I am about 150 pages shy of finishing my first reading of SD that is absolutely no guarantee that I have 'understood' more than 10% of what is said in it (the same BTW goes for AAB books that I have read, but some of them I have re-read a few times... Are there any other takers out there (Brenda/Eldon/Paul/Don/Jerry S/John...) to join us in this search? What do you think, and can we try to 'flush out' this thought a little bit and perhaps come up with a conjecture or a hypothesis before we begin the study... > For consciousness, HPB refers to that as an aspect of the > second part of the triple evolutionary scheme. See the SD vol. I > p. 181, second full paragraph etc. Therefore, I amend my last > statement that "HPB did not have a psychological key" to: H.P.B. > did not have a psychological key either according to the standard > definition of psychology during her time, or to the definition > given on page xii of TCF. I will hold this position, until > someone finds a quote where HPB cites a psychological key, or > shows that this psychological key is another term for one of the > keys she has given. I'm still patiently waiting. > > 3. p xvi. The third revised Edition was published in 1893, two > years after H.P.B.'s death. As I had pointed out earlier, some > U.L.T. students counted over 10,000 changes in this edition from > the one published by HPB. Is the use of this edition an > endorsement to the correctness of these changes? Does the use of > this edition imply that this edition is superior to the original? There is no endorsement as far as I know by AAB that the third edition of SD is the most sacrosant; more likely that was the edition that she had access to, or was perceived to be the most popular at the time... > 4. p xvii. I have read the quotes as you suggested. > > You wrote: > > I am really at a loss to know why you have such > a hard time verifying for yourself whether TCF is compatible > with SD or not. You seem to have very thoroughly researched > SD and it seems to me that you will be able to catch any > 'hanky panky' material right away. What, my dear Sir, > prevents you from quoting an incompataibility between TCF > and SD, so we can put the issue of the 'genuineness' of AAB > as a spiritual teacher to test? If it is mere lack of time, > I can understand. But if it is that 'others say that AAB > was a channeler' or something like that, you need to > re-examine your position! > > I'm afraid that you have confused me here. This was the > first time I was aware that you wanted me to quote an > "incompatability between TCF and SD." Since I have never read > TCF, how could I quote such an incompatability? I never had any > intention of searching for any incompatibilities to quote to you > in the first place. I have better things to do with my time. My > purpose was to compare the works of AAB with those of HPB. I am > well read on HPB and have read a little of AAB. You are well > read on AAB and have read a little of HPB. Therefore, I thought > we would be able to explore these writings together, using each > other's area of expertise. I suggest you re-read my earliest > messages to you where I had proposed this collaborative study in > the first place. From your above statement, my guess is that you > are coming from the assumption that HPB and AAB's writing are > compatible, and further, my guess is that you are also assuming > that I am assuming that they are not. Since I never declared > such an assumption (and frankly I don't really care whether they > turn out to be compatible or incompatible), I think you are being > unfair to me. My apologies again for miscommunicating. Yes, let us attempt to compare TCF with SD as I suggested elsewhere (above). > I also don't recall writing that I wanted to put AAB's > genuineness "as a spiritual leader" to a test. How does > comparing AAB to HPB test AAB as a spiritual leader? Obviously > she is a spiritual leader, because she has followers who regard > her as a spiritual leader. Are you suggesting that AAB's > genuineness as a spiritual leader depends upon HPB? What if HPB > was found not to be genuine? Then what happens to AAB? Perhaps > you need to clarify what you mean. > > Whether or not AAB was a "channeler" is another question, > which I also never raised. In fact, I'm not sure as to what you > mean by "channeler." I assume you are referring to how she got > her information. If you mean something different, you will need > to clarify. As I recall, Bailey discussed how she got her > information in her Autobiography, and I had taken her > description, like everything else, at face value. Are you > suggesting that I was wrong in doing this? As John Mead and perhaps others on this network have pointed out, AAB commands a substantial following, and she is one of the stalwarts of the theosophic movement no matter what you or I think. I do believe that she as well as HPB were 'genuine', and in fact 'disproving' HPB is tantamount to disproving AAB, due to the statements in AAB's writings about HPB. The only reason I have heard as to why 'mainstream' theosophists have problems with AAB is that they think she used 'astral' channeling to write her books. This is bunk, in my opinion. The test of the pudding is in its taste, that is why I am hoping that at least a good, sincere effort at understanding what Bailey has written is worthwhile. > My understanding of this dialogue, is that we are comparing > the works of these two writers. Presently, we are trying to > solve this issue concerning the "psychological key" and the > prophesy in TCF that HPB prophesied that someone would write a > "psychological key" to the SD. I'm being perfectly straight > forward with you when I say that I have never read such a > prophesy. If it exists, I want to see the reference. If HPB > named a psychological key, I want to see that reference too. If > we find these references, our understanding of both HPB and AAB > will be enriched. If we find that they don't exist, then we will > be enriched by that too. It is a win-win situation. Got to go now. I do wish to once again thank you for your patience in dealing with me and rather well-researched responses (at least as compared to my responses) on various topics. In Brotherhood, Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1993 16:13:44 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: please explain Johnson, Caldwell, and everyone discussing Johnson's books: I've been reading on 'theos-l' about Paul's books and how they are disagreed with. There's something in the books that is not liked. I haven't read the books, but am curious. Without getting into the details, nor dealing with the manner in which any of the criticism has been handled to date, I'd like to ask if someone could formulate the basic philosophical differences. Without stating that such-and-such fact is correct, or stating that these facts were overlooked, without taking an approach of attempting to prove or disprove the materials, could someone present the points of philosophy where the differences are? (That is, "Johnson makes it seem as though ..., but really we know that ...") ---- I found an interesting quote on the network recently: "If what you did yesterday still looks good to you --then your goals for tomorrow are not big enough." [Ling Fu Yu, ca 600 B.C.] ---- Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 03:17:29 -0500 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Paul's books etc. Paul Johnson Well referenced capsule biographies are useful also, if you stay with the material and not drift into theorizing. What I had in mind is that you compile and reprint some of the source material, concerning contacts with the masters. Permissions shouldn't be a problem as all of this is in public domain. I think there would be a lot of interest in such a compilation. Dan Caldwell's compilations of people's accounts of their contacts with H.P.B. was in the back of my mind as a model for what I was thinking. As you have recently learned from feedback on your first book, some of your theories are about as pleasant for Theosophists to hear as finger nails on a blackboard. I think a compilation without theorizing would be more constructive for the movement, in the long run. I'm glad you decided to leave Besant and Leadbeater in. I think the 1907 cut off is a fair principle of inclusion. It avoids a lot of unnecessary complications. Personally, As I have told you in person, I enjoyed reading your original book, and found a lot of value in it, though I disagreed with most of your conclusions, and feel (as others do) that you had over reached the boundaries of good research. But among theosophists, I'm in the minority in that I'm not very inclined to get upset when someone proposes theories in disagreement with mine. As I read your intention for this new book as described in your answer to Terry Hobbes, I am a little concerned. I found your article in Gnosis very problematical, and doubt if any reasonable amount of revision will resolve the problems in it. For example, your citation of the alleged order to Olcott to forge Mahatma letters is a rather original reading of these letters. Since the Mahatma Letters have been publicly available since 1923, it is curious that you would be the first critic to find such easily available evidence. I also have copies of the secret government documents that you refer to and have read through them. Since these documents concluded that there was no evidence against H.P.B., I find it curious that you can find anything significant in them except that British government was watching her. But I hardly found that to be a revelation. But like you first book, my guess is that this one will be a mixed bag, and I'm sure that I will enjoy this one too. I'm sorry to hear that Caldwell's published correspondence with you was really private. However I would like to see you publicly debate your positions--under fair conditions of course. Eldon Tucker In a nutshell (and no doubt Paul will correct any inaccuracies) ISM argues that HPB's descriptions of the masters were covers for their real identities. He argues that H.P.B's Masters were not Tibetans or Punjabi Sikhs, but Sufis who where known, and lived in India at the same time as H.P.B. Arvind I looked over your last response, and see nothing that requires a response from me at this time. I will be out of town until next year, but if there is an opportunity, I might look in on the board. Otherwise have a Happy Holiday, and in the mean time, perhaps someone will find your psychological key and prophesy. As for why some Theosophists don't like Bailey, I have a theory on this, and may have the evidence to support it by the time I get back. I don't think the objection has anything to do with "astral channeling." In fact, I don't think the real reason has ever been published. More on this later. Jerry Hejka-Ekins From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 10:01:03 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: the frontiers of what we know In a study of Theosophy, we find that the more that we learn, the more that we push back the frontiers of our knowledge, the more that we grown in an understanding of the Teachings, the more lacking in understanding we realize that we are. With each further insight into the mysteries of life, we come to find even more unanswered questions that we had before. But the questions are different, deeper, richer, more full of wonder. We find that the study of the Esoteric Philosophy expands and there is increasingly more to it with each passing day. A good analogy would be to a sphere. What is contained within it is the known, and what is outside it is the unknown. As the sphere grows to contain more and more of the unknown, its surface area expands. And that surface area, the boundary between the known and unknown, in growing, represents increasingly more unanswered questions about life. As we progress in our studies, we find that life has more and more wonders to it, that life becomes more wonderful with each passing day, and the only limit to what we will contain is ourselves, our own individual reach and ability to contain things. The first, and primary source of our studies, as students of Theosophy, is from our Teachers, reaching down to us from a grand chain of teacher receiving from still greater Teacher, a chain reaching inwards and upwards until we can no longer follow it, a golden succession of Teachers and Teachings, of a passing on of light and wisdom and love, called sometimes by the term *guruparampara*. When the Teachings reach us, in the western world, the connection may be weak, tenuous, somewhat uncertain, but there is a connection. And that connection is a holy, sacred one, for it deals with something very special that we all carry within, the light of buddhic consciousness, the buddhic splendor. The awakening of this light within ourselves is an individual thing, we must *do it ourselves*, but still there needs to be a connection to the golden chain, a connection to the Hierarchy of Compassion and its influence in the world. We are told that when the student is ready, the teacher will appear. And we are told that when we approach the temple door, and give the right knock, that we will be granted admission. In these and other ways, we are told that upon reaching the proper state of readiness and making the call in our hearts, that the call will be answered and we will be admitted, that we will be accepted into the work. This being admitted, though, is not a matter of asking *to receive* and then *getting*. If our thoughts are solely of self, of our own personal benefit, we are not truly ready, and will be passed over. Others may come and bait us with promices of riches and powers, of wealth and influence in this world or of rapid inner development, but we must depend upon our own good fortune, our good karma, and perhaps some help from above, to not be drawn into these other things. And should we be ensnared, we at best can expect to be delayed, if not spiritually harmed. An esoteric teacher will not *tell* you, he will set the proper stage, establish the correct atmosphere, and *evoke* the ideas out of you. The teacher will bring you to the point of readiness where you will on your own arrive at the ideas. The ideas then truly belong to you, you genuinely understand them, and you, most importantly, have exercized and developed a bit more your own innate ability to approach the ideas directly, by way of your own inner teacher. Meeting a Teacher in life is rare, extremely rare, and we should not assume that we cannot progress without one. In a general sense, life itself is our teacher, and we draw about us those things that we most need for our growth and for our own exercise of our innate spiritual faculties. In a more specific sense, there are other approaches to a teacher, apart from knowing one in person, in the body. The most obvious contact, one which we have now, is through the writings of that teacher. The writings of Mahatmas K.H. and M. are available in a book of their letters, and through the writings of their chelas, some of whom like H.P. Blavatsky where working with the express purpose of making certain teachings publically available. Now you might say that you've bought H.P.B.'s books and read them, and now what should you do? But have you really read them? Have you *really* read the source books and penetrated deeply into what they say? The theosophical literature does not stop at the plain, obvious, extoeric intepretations of its words. There are many levels of meaning to them. There are not only different keys or manners of interpretation to pull out meanings from the words, but there are also many levels of understanding of the Teachings themselves. The Teachings are hinted at, they are talked around, portions of them are presented here and there, and the intent is to ready the student to suddenly, on his own, to pull it all together, with a big *ah hah!* and have his own realizations. Certain grand truths would either sound silly, or be unintelligable, if told plainly, to someone without the proper mental preparation and readiness. And it is not because the ideas are themselves nonsense, but rather that there are no good words to use to describe them, no richness of language in English to convey them, and many go far beyond simple words to describe. The deeper Truths cannot be passed on as a written heritage. They can only be preserved by the high Mahatmas as an oral tradition. There may be symbol and glyph as teaching aids, but the actual understanding is passed on from Guru to Disciple, from teacher to student, from learned Mahatma to Mahatma whom would know and carry on the living knowledge. The written record, be it in senzar or whatever language or symbol set, acts more as a outline of topics than a commentary or discourse on the Wisdom Tradition. For us, we can look to life for teaching us. If we open up to the spiritual, the circumstances of our life will arrange themselves so as to teach us. And this teaching is in the form of circumstances that evoke from us, that provide for situations where we can exercize from our own initiative our spiritual will, our compassion, and our ability *to know*. We can also find that through the books themselves, that we can be put into touch with the Teachers. The thought atmosphere is there, the thought atmosphere of the Mysteries of ancient day, and when we dwell therein, we can grow in wisdom and find ourselves drawn into karmic connection with the work of the Masters. In our study of Theosophy, we must not stand at the shoreline, looking at the waters, and never jump in! We have the books, we have the philsophy that tells us what we must do. We can keep it as an emotional game of make-believe this or make-believe that; we can keep it as a hobby; we can keep it as an intellectual exercise of reading and simply repeating what we've read, as a collector of curious ideas. Or, on the other hand, we can take it as real, believe it, and do it! We will never find out what it's really about until we engage it in our lives, until we give it the same belief and confidence and trust that we give to the sun rising in the morning, or to the continued beat of our hearts! Our approach to this reality is not made simply by intelletual accuracy. The understanding of the Teachings that we arrive at is no closer to the Truth, when we can say that this idea comes from a quote by K.H., that one by M., and the third by H.P.B. in such-and-such a book. When we take Theosophy and *practice* it, we find that we can go far in our understanding of the philosophy, and we find the ideas proved from within, for there is a way of connecting up with the *source* of the teachings, that goes beyond any book read, that lets us go places in our deeper thoughts that go unmentioned in the books. We have a responsibility to pass on what we have learned. And we must communicate as competely and accurately what we know as we can. But it is still a matter of personal discretion as to how far we go, as to when we remain silent and say no more. There may be quite a number of students of Theosophy that know more than they feel free to talk about. The Esoteric Philosophy quickly takes us to doctrines that are difficult if possible at all to put into words. It contains Teachings that cannot be communicated without the proper state of readiness in the learner, and for which few have readied themselves. It is something that is real, genuine, and available for the taking, and it is possible, when knowing it, to distinguish it from the false. No matter how brilliant and clever the words, they will take the reader no farther than what was contained in the mind and heart of the writer. If we approach our studies--and our times of writing as well-- with open minds, with aspiring hearts, with an unselfish seeking to benefit others, with a sense of approaching Mystery and allying ourselves with the thought current of the Wisdom Tradition, then we will succeed. We will then penetrate the unknown and find that there is knowledge therein, and will have grown and be more helpful to others because of the experience. One sign that we are on the right track is that as we study, as we progress from one level of understanding to the next, we find that we are not tossed to and fro in our thinking, we do not one day reject an idea, the next day embrace it, and on the next morning discard it anew. We start off with the core concepts, and find them increasingly enriched at each step along the way. But we find that with new, deeper levels of meaning to the doctrines, that we have fuller, more complete, richer ways of looking at them. The terminology used in our literature was borrowed from the various religions and philosophies of the world. The terms are borrowed and do not always carry the same meaning for us as in their native philosophy or religion. And the terms are used with multiple meanings, as a blind, to allow for deeper teachings to be given, under the veil of saying simplier things. Our real challenge is to take these hints, these deeper thoughts, and to explore them. When we pause in our reading, and think about the passage before us, it is in that time that we are really doing our study. The words act as a seed, and the ideas are born as we bring them to germination within our minds and hearts. We take the written words as a diving board, off of which we jump into the Teachings. And we find that there's a whole world of experience awaiting us! We should always strive to communicate what we've learned, to do so as accurately and truthfully as possible. We should take great pains to insure that the philosophy is not misrepresented and others are not mislead. But when we speak of being true to the philosophy, we are refering to the *philosophy itself*, the living Wisdom Tradition, the reality that the printed words only point to. We must be faithful to the underlying reality, and that does not mean that we can teach each idea to a specific writer, like this one came from K.H., that one from Damodar, the third from Purucker. We should, rather, trace each idea back to the Mystery, the living understanding that we can carry within ourselves, and insure that it is infilled with the inspiriation and sense of the spirit that it was borne to us in. We keep the ideas true to the *source*, but that source is not a quote. The source is the living inspiration, the reality that we come into contact with in our deeper studies. The ideas remain true to it as long as they carry that inspiration in our lives, and we communicate them true to their source *when they convey that inspiration*. Let us seek out the truth, go after the Wisdom Tradition, delve deeply into the Teachings. And take what we have in life, what surrounds us, and use as our teachers what we find. For we are all surrounded by all the teachers that we will ever need. Perhaps we will grow and change and over time other, grander teachers will appear. But for ourselves, where we are in live at this very moment, we have teachers about it, hidden perhaps, teachers in many forms that can be engaged at this very moment in time! Let's wake up and get going! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 11:28:41 -0500 From: "Jessica L. Coker" Subject: Re: AAB and HPB, and Keys To Jerry & Arvind & all from Nancy You folks are much more productive than I, I can hardly keep up with the mail, so if I have missed this reference, please excuse me I have recently come across a small book/pamphlet called THE PSEUDO OCCULT OF MRS. A. BAILEY by Cleather and Crump published in 1929 in Manila. Have you already discussed this? Some close friends recently told of a healing of one of their clients which I find hard to understand. A child was born deaf and without the proper physical hookups in her ear. That is to say, the physical apparatus needed wasn't right. In her late 20's she went to a faith/psychic healer who put hands to ears, now she can hear and is slowly learning to communicate. How can we explain what might have happened theosophically? I can imagine that a mahatma can learn to do things w/o the physical organs being intact, but I don't have a model that helps explain this phenomoneon. Dr. says it is a miracle -- medical science has no explanation. Apparently she did not have high expectations when she went to the healer. Thanks to whoever sent the Christmas pictures. Is there any interest in metaphysical humor? We are certainly a serious group. Merry merry and happy happy and to all a goodnight. Nancy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 13:17:25 -0500 From: HOBB@delphi.com Subject: Johnson's book and Caldwell's Open Letters by Terry Hobbes, Boston In. address: hobb@delphi.com I tracked down Mr. Caldwell's phone number yesterday and gave him a ring. I relayed Paul Johnson's messages posted on Theos-L yesterday. Mr. Caldwell told me to please post the following on Theos-L since he no longer subscribes to Theos-L. "The 2 open letters to Paul Johnson are not for sale. No copies have been sold. A number of copies were given to various Theosophical correspondents. Johnson's replies to the 2 letters have not been cir- culated and will not be circulated at Paul Johnson's request. Copies of the 2 open letters were sent to Theosophical correspondents not to irritate Paul Johnson but hopefully to inform and provoke discussion of this subject. Many Theosophists have a negative view of Johnson's book and have not even read it! Paul Johnson's book is a must read for serious students of Theosophy but, saying that, there are many flaws in the book. I hope Paul Johnson will not think unkindly of me. I spent literally dozens of hours reading, studying and analyzing his book in order to response to his initial request to give him feedback. And I told him in my first reply that I was sending copies to a dozen or so Theosophists. As far as I am concerned this is a closed topic. I will not send out any more copies of my 2 Replies. If anyone wants copies, please address your request to Paul Johnson. If if wants to give out copies of my replies, that's okay with me. My desire in writing my replies was to get out that elusive thing we all are searching for ... the TRUTH ... my intention was not to create bad feelings, etc. I hope interested students will read Paul Johnson's In search of the Masters and will also buy a copy of his new book when it comes out. I know I will be looking forward to its publication. Daniel Calwell." Sorry for the typing errors. Terry Hobbes From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 15:41:19 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: a beautiful picture emerging One difficult subject to discuss regards objective existence apart from our physical world as we know it. Apart from physical existence in bodies of flesh and bone here on Globe D, what exists and what is real? We learn of spheres of causes and spheres of effects. We know of the globes of our planetary chain, each pair on a different plane. We know that there are bigger scales of being that our existence as a person living on some globe, there are scales of being that embrace the entire solar system, and others yet bigger. Where and how and what are we in these places and at these scales of being? A lot of teachings come into play as we try to explore the topic. We need to be aware of the planes or spaces of consciousness. The ten principles of man are involved. Also the Monads, Egos, and Souls are an important consideration. First, let's look at who and what we are, and the scale of being at which we exist. Let's consider our current place in the scheme of things, before broadening our view to embrace other and bigger worlds. We are Human Monads, or rather, we are Monads whose evolution to this point, whose self-unfolding has progressed to the point where its self-conscious ray, its Ego, has progressed to the Human Kingdom. We have passed through all the previous kingdoms, through the three Elemental, the Mineral, Plant, and Animal Kingdoms. And we will in the future move on through the three Dhyani-Chohanic Kingdoms. We are at the scale of being where we exist as members of these various kingdoms of nature, as we find them here on the earth, or on its sister globes. We are particularly the Human Egos, the growing, evolving, self-consciousness spark of divinity whom have the potential to--but not the absolute guarantee of--rising one day into perfection and immortality. That is, one day, we may be reabsorbed into our Monad and achieve relative perfection. First, we should review what we mean by *scale of being*, and how this relates to the subsequent Teachings that we consider. We are talking about an aspect of the Heavenly Man, of the macrocosm/microcosm duality, of the concept of organized structure and the informing life that brings it together. We are dealing with how a particular being, in coming into existence, creates a whole world for lesser beings to exist in, and becomes in a way their god. Looking at ourselves, when we are born, we take on physical bodies, and clothe ourselves in substances of which all the principles consist, from Atman through the Sthula Sharira. These substances have a life of their own, and form not only our own forms, but also that of a almost-numberless host of life atoms. Those life atoms exist in us, as their world or universe. Our existence, to them, might seem like a manvanatra of sorts. The same holds true of us in the previous kingdoms, from the Elemental through Animal, and in future kingdoms, the Dhyani-Chohanic, as well. We find ourselves born as a being in a particular kingdom, clothe ourselves in our seven principles, patterned after the nature of the kingdom in which we exist, and ourselves become the host for a whole world of littler beings. As members of one of the ten kingdoms of nature, here on a planetary chain, we exist in a particular scale of being. As we progress, we move to higher and higher kingdoms, and eventually reach completion. Then we start over again, with another sweep of evolution throught the kingdoms again. Our evolution is never complete. We periodically reach out and strive for further self-consciousness through the descend into matter. And this is cyclic, through a series of stages or kingdoms, and not a simple linear progress, not a progression of higher plane after higher plane without end, through kingdoms 1000, 1001, and later 100,000, 100,001, and so on. The progression is cyclic, with each cycle expanding a bit to embrace more, but everything repeats itself. In this progression, we are not talking about *shifting scales*. We are not one day a member of a kingdom, and the next day a planetary chain! When we move on to higher worlds, it is in terms of content, of capacity of conscciousness, of planes of existence, and is not a matter of scale. Now that is not to say that at different levels of development, we don't embrace more and more of what is. That would not be true. We do include more of life with each step forward. As a Higher Human Monad, the scope or extent of our consciousness takes in the entire chain. In the Spiritual Monad, we take in the entire solar system. And the Divine Monad embraces even more. This increasing scope of consciousness, though, does not change our scale. When we, as Monads, take in the entire globe chain, we have not become globe chains. We still are beings in a kingdom in it, and not a chain ourselves. Our scope widens to embrace more, as we progress, but our scale of being has not changed. There are two parts to the scale of being. One regards what we take in and embrace as beings in this world, in this planetary chain and solar system. This has to do with the ability of the Monad to function, to express itself, to take in and participate in what is going on. There are different names for our essential nature, as we progress in this manner, and take in more and more of what life offers us, as we move forward in this school of life. The most commonly used terms for beings at the different levels are Gods, Monads, and Atoms, sometimes expanded to include more, like Gods, Monads, Egos, Souls, Atoms, and Bodies, for instance. Take the simpler three-fold breakdown. The Atoms are beings that are the most limited in scope, and are concerned most particularly with formulating the substances and elements of the world. The Monads are beings that are broader in reach, and are concerned with fashioning the substances of the world, of functioning in the role of builders. And the Gods are beings that have the boradest reach, and concern themselves with the architecture of the world, with fashioning the natures of the builders and the patterns of life. When we consider this breakdown, we have various classes of beings, within the same scale of being, each class directing and overshadowing the ones below it. This illustrates the concept of hierarchy, with a descent and deligation of authority and influence from the topmost to the lower levels. It is how the beings of our world are organized and participate in life together. The other aspect to scales of being concerns the idea of the Heavenly Man. We have a great being, unknowable directly, knowable only by analogy to us, whose birth and existence provides the informing life that creates and holds together our world or universe. This being is no more concerned with any of us individually than we would be with a particular red blood cell in one of our fingertips! The Heavenly Man is in another world, in a sense, in an entirely different, though interdependent, aspect of existence. His world is not different from ours in the sense of being on a higher or lower plane, nor in terms of spiritual evolution, but only in terms of scale of being. We never enter his scale, nor do we enter a lower scale of being. There is one particular scale that is ours, and will always be ours. There's a good mathematical analogy to this in a fractal. Consider a fractal line. It has infinite detail, infinite variability, infinite length. At any scale of magnification, we see the same pattern repeated in mineature, the microcosm in the macrocosm. At a particular scale of magnification, we see the universal pattern appearing a number of times. Taking one occurrence of that pattern, we can magnify it another scale, and find the same pattern happening again, a number of times. We can do this indefinitely. With our analogy to the fractal line, we could say that the whole nature of the line itself is growing, evolving, changing, but we don't see one copy of the pattern, at a certain scale, suddenly grow in size and enter the next scale. We see overall changes, but not a shifting of scales within this fractal, and it gives us a way to think about the scales of being in nature. Following this tought, we may one day find ourselves to be whole worlds, where our embodiment is as planetary chains, but by the time that this has happened, everything, everywhere, as grown and changed as well, so that everything is bigger and we really haven't changed scales after all. Coming back to our discussion, then, we are at a particular scale of being that puts us in the kingdoms of nature, and due to our stage of evolution, we find ourselves to be Human Monads. This determines where we can, and where we cannot exist, and places certain constraints or limits on us. Beings at our scale could be Elementals, Minerals, Plants, Animals, Humans, and Dhyani-Chohans. Our evolutionary progression takes us from one kingdom to the next. In addition to the kingdom that we are in, there's the level of participation in life, the position in the hierarchy, the class of being that we are. This determines if we are an object, a builder, or an architect. These classes represent three parallel streams of evolution. As a human, we could be either a builder or an architect, depending upon our relation to our inner nature and to the spiritual. If we bring ourselves to be closely allied with the spiritual, and to participate in the work of the Hierarchy of Compassion, then we are drawn into the work of the architects and will join their ranks. If we are solely concentrated in our personal lives, and look no higher, then we continue in the role of a builder. Continuing our human evolution according to its normal course, growing and evolving according to the flow of life, according to the lessons that our human lifewave presents us over the ages, we continue as builders and one day may join the ranks of the Dhyani Chohans, still as builders or Monads. Should we rise about that, should we feel a higher calling and undertake the path of hastened evolution in order to be of service to humanity, then we are entering on a path that will make us architects and one day join the ranks of the Gods. We will become Gods rather than Monads. Our destiny, then, would be to join the ranks of the Dhyani Buddhas, a more sublime reward and more challenging activity, that just becoming a Monad in the Dhyani-Chohanic Kingdom. In our world, the scope of our activities is determined by the stream of evolution that we are in, that of the builders, and as Monads we find our range of activities limited to a single globe of our planetary chain. At a much-higher level, as a God, our conscious field of activity spans the solar system, as we function in and through our Spiritual Monads. Whatever the globe, world, or universe that defines our scope of activity, we find ourselves taking on embodiment therein, and clothe ourselves in the substances of that place. Our skandhas are drawn from it, and come together to make up our natures. As Globe D personalities, we draw upon the nature of this globe to build our seven principles. As Planetaries, we draw upon the nature of our entire chain to build a different type of seven principles. And as yet greater beings, we may one day draw upon the nature of our entire solar system to build up a still grander set of principles. Now when we talk about drawing together the materials that will compose our principles, we are not literally saying that the principles are merely substances. We are saying, rather, that we take on certain types of consciousness, and because of it also populate our natures with lessor beings of the same type of consciousness. Like when we take on Manas, we take on that nature of awareness, and not something material, and populate it with thoughts, with thoughtforms that are beings in their own right. This coming into existence, thought, this taking on of the various aspects of consciousness as we manifest ourselves--it is due to there being a globe, a world, a universe wherein we can exist. There must be a world with other beings for us to be able to exist. It must already be there. For we are not separate individuals, in the final analysis, we exist because of our relationships with everything else, and our nature is composed of the sum of our interconnections with others, of our karmic web, of our ties and bonds with other beings in a particular world. We could not exist if we were the only being in a world. It would not be possible. Now we can also take and consider the reverse of this. When we move away from existence in a world, when we let go, for the moment, of the ties that bind us to others, we do not exist as individuals, but we *still can exist* in and unto ourselves. This is the experience of being out of manifestation, yet manifesting, which is what we approach as we disengage ourselves from the world, and move farther and farther from where it is, in the astral light or akasha, and approach the point where it no longer affects who and what we may be. In such a state, we are karmaless, we are not in interaction with others, there is no cause-and-effect relationships in action, because, for the moment, all ties to others have been dropped. We are also amorphous, without any sense of permanent, fixed self, since the sense of self is derived by *relationship*, which we are for the moment withdrawn from. We could experience this state, where it possible to paralyze the personality, and we experience it in the after-death states as we drop our seven Globe D principles, before moving on to Globe E. The state has little, if any, self-consciousness, and we naturally seek to avoid it, seeking rather to have embodied existences so that we can acquire self-consciousness, which is the greatest of Treasures. As we continue to explore this subject, we may find that the more that we seek to find answers, the more questions that we open up, and the greater the number of things to consider and contemplate. Such is the case with a study of the Esoteric Philosophy. The further we go, the more we realize that we don't know, and the more pieces we find to the puzzle. But even so, the part of the puzzle that we've solved continues to grow with each passing day, and we find a quite beautiful picture emerging! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 17:13:36 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: time of the winter solstice It is the time of the Winter Solstice, and another year has begun. We are again at one of the Sacred Seasons, a time when special things happen. It is at these points of the year in which the great initiations take place, and the world becomes a better place. The Winter Solstice is the time of a spiritual birth. The initiant undergoes his fourth initiation, the first in which he actually travels to other worlds, meets, and becomes for a moment some of the beings thereon. It is a time when the initiant meets his inner god, his higher self, his Manasaputra, face-to-face, and beholds for the first time the living being that overshadows, inspires, and enfills his life. He realizes his own inner nature as well, and a spark is lit, a spark of consciousness that one day will become the full blazing awareness of himself being, on his own, a Manasaputra in his own right. Something new is born at this very special moment. At this time of year, old things drop away and new things are born into the world. It is a natural process of life, and we can partake in it. We can find it easier to make changes in our lives, to alter and improve our personalities, to take steps to change and grow. We are at the time of the true New Year. And in our own small way, in making New Year's resolutions, in resolving to better our lives and the lives of those about us, we too have paid a visit to our inner natures, and emerge with something more into the world. If the resolve is sincere, and the intentions pure, we too have changed. Let us pause in our hectic rush through life, consider the great and wonderful things happening on the inner planes, then move forward with our lives. Let us move forward with greater inspiration to be better and to be of genuine value to others. Let us reflect on the good that surrounds us in life, make it more a part of ourselves, and share it with others. It is a wondrous time of year, one that should gladden our hearts. Some of us may have approached the threshold, tried the door, and been admitted. The world has become better, a holier place, and if we listen, with open hearts, we can feel it and be inspired! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 20:55:11 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Comments to Arvind Arvind. I would not go so far as to say that "all disease happens on the mental or astral levels first." Ken Wilber wrote an excellent article last year in New Age Magazine about this saying that this belief leads to guilt and doesn't help anyone very much. He also gives examples where it isn't true. For example, if you become exposed to radioactive material, you can get cancer no matter how "good" your thinking is. Of course, I believe that karma must be added to the equation somewhere as well. The fact is, you can get disease from physical causes and not just from mental or astral causes. But, perhaps, this itself is your karma? You seem to be confusing the planes in what you said. "Does this mean that I have already sent this message on the Astral, or (hopefully) Mental plane?" Yes. You sent it out on the mental plane when you thought it. "Does this discussion group exist on the Mental plane?" Let me answer by saying that all of our minds exist on the mental plane and nowhere else. Only our physical bodies are located on and limited to Globe D on the physical plane. Our "true nature" is not a "Dhayan" Chohan. As we evolve, we will progress from the human kingdom to that of the Dhyani Chohans (who reside above the lower four cosmic planes), but that will be as illusive as the human and animal and all of the rest. I firmly believe that we are, in our very inner essence, a divine monad - a spark of divinity. All of the other monads that theosophical literature talks about are temporary and mayavic. For example, we have a "human monad," but this is only on Globe D and thus it is temporary and will dissipate like mist on the day that we recognise our true nature. Our true nature is divine, which is one step up from the spiritual. We have a monad on each cosmic plane, but only the divine is eternal and infinite, the others all being its expression. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1993 20:55:50 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Reactions to Articles The Biological Function of the Third Eye is a well-written and terribly interesting article by Richard Alan Miller. It is in the library, and I recommend averyone reading it. Richard makes the argument that Kundalini Yoga is "a biological statement contained within the language of the poetic metaphor." I suspect that Gopi Krishna ("Kundalini", Shambala) would agree with this. I certainly do. I have practiced Kundalini Yoga for about 25 years, although I never used it for healing. My own feeling is that the pineal gland and everything else in our physical body is an expression of our causal, mental, and astral makeup which is grounded in personal and collective karma. Nevertheless, I find all of the new information coming out on the chemicals and glands of our body to be absolutely fascinating. Richard's description of serotonin and LSD-25 tie in nicely with Donald DeGracia's articles. Don writes, "When you hallucinate, you are literally seeing into the nonphysical planes. These drugs stimulate a minor degree of clairvoyance." While this is doubtless true, I personally prefer yoga to drugs. He further says that "Your emotions and mind (and buddhi) are sensory systems that both emit and detect vibrations on the respective planes." I agree, but prefer the terms astral body and mental body simply because when we think of senses, we usually associate them with a body owing to our close association with our physical senses and physical body. But I think that what these fellows are saying helps put theosophy in a mdoern perspective and I applaud their work. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 15:47:36 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Globes, Planes, and Bodies I would like to discuss the globes, planes, and bodies yet again. I don't think that the basic ideas are clearly understood yet. There seems to be a great deal of confusion about just where the globes are, about what the difference between a body and a principle is, and about the planes in general. The 7 principles are not the 7 bodies but for all intents and purposes, they can be considered identical. As far as I know, theosophy is the *only* group/religion to distinguish any real difference. As far as practical application is concerned, they are one and the same. But I will agree that in theory, a principle is not a body. rather, a principle informs and oversee a body. It may help if you think of a body as a crystallized or condensed principle. The 7 Principles. HPB gives these (without accents) as: Sthula- Sarira, Linga-Sarira, Kama, Lower Manas, Upper Manas, Buddhi, and the Auric Egg (see page 529 of Vol XII of her Collected Works). None of these terms have made it into todays vocabulary, and I doubt that many theosophists could pronounce them properly. Anyway, she deletes Atman from the list saying, "we see that Atman is no "principle" but stands separate from the Man." This clearly shows us that her 7 principles (as opposed to bodies) are the components of the manifestation or self-expression of Atman, which remains spsiritual/divine and "separate." Why separate? Because Atman is above our planetary chain, while all 7 principles are somewhere within in. This is further amplified on the very next page (page 530) where she says, "Thus man functions on, and responds to, seven distinct yet correlated wave-lengths (this in italics), each of which corresponds to a specific plane or world of being, while the One Cosmic Life-Consciousness, binding and permeating everything, flows through all of them." HPB thus clearly states that we have 7 principles, and there is one principle for each cosmic plane - not 7 principles for each plane. Judge says that "Plane of consciousness is used to designate the stage or metaphysical place the consciousness has reached or may be on or in ... plane (word is in italics) means a place for operation or use, and principle (word is in italics) is that which uses or operates on a plane." (page 325, Echoes of the Orient, Vol II). I think that Judge pretty well sums it up here. On the same page, he also points out that "it must be remembered that the word "principle" is used loosely, and sometimes that which is not such is so called." Thus different theosophical authors used the term 'principle' differently and the word should be read with care. I may be beating a dead horse bu now, but let me quote HPB again. She says, "The field of consciousness of the Higher Ego is never reflected in the Astral Light." (Inner Group Teachings, page 87). The Higher Ego or Reincarnating Ego is Buddhi-Manas. What she is saying, is that buddhi-manas does not act on or affect the Astral Light, which is the aura of our planet Earth - Globe D of our planetary chain. In short, our higher principles are far above Globe D and have little intercourse with it. While we have one and only one principle acting on each plane, each globe of our planetary chain is sevenfold and does have 7 principles. On Globe D, these are taken together and called the Astral Light. G de P says, "You cannot make an exact correspondence between seven material things and the seven principles of the human being. All the Globes are bodies, all the Globes are vehicles, temporary composites ... But each Globe in addition has its own six principles, therefore its own septenary constitution." (Dialogues, Vol II, page 225). I personally hate it when someone gives me a lot of quotes from the experts to support a point, but admittedly there are times when this is necessary. I feel that this is such a time. I have provided a few quotes (there are lots more) to support my thesis that we have one principle per plane, and that each plane has seven subplanes and that each globe has 7 principles, each on one of the subplanes of its plane. If we want to get technical and say that each principle can be divided into seven subprinciples, one on each subplane of a cosmic plane, then I suppose that this would be alright, albeit a bit confusing in a topic that seems to be quite confusing enough. I hope now that students and others who are relatively new to theosophy will realize that because a principle is "that which uses or operates on a plane" there is, in fact, little difference between a body and a principle, at least in one's experience of the globes, including our Globe D. We can think of a body as a vehicle for our principle but only if we agree that our principles are actually aspects of consciousness. Remember, Globe D houses or incorporates only our physical body and sthula- sarira, the only one of our principles that is on the physical plane. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 15:57:54 -0500 From: HOBB@delphi.com (Terry) Subject: Corrections of 2 typos in previous memos by Terry Hobbes, Boston In. address: hobb@delphi.com I want to point out two typos in the memo I transmitted for Mr. Caldwell. I will retype the part of the text where the typos were. "...If he wants to give out copies of my replies, that's okay with me. My desire in writing my replies was to get at that elusive thing we all are searching for. . . . the TRUTH . . ." I believe that makes the text more readable. Everyone have a Merry Christmas and Happy, Happy 1994. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1993 20:03:30 -0500 From: OSMAR DE CARVALHO Subject: Re: Subject: time o To Eldon Tucker > It is a wondrous time of year, one that should gladden our hearts. > Some of us may have approached the threshold, tried the door, and > been admitted. The world has become better, a holier place, and > if we listen, with open hearts, we can feel it and be inspired! I endorse all your words, and send my best wishes to you, for your inspiring and dedicated contributions, and for all brothers of theos-l who make these discussions a living exercise of spiritual growth. > It is the time of the Winter Solstice, and another year has begun. > We are again at one of the Sacred Seasons, a time when special > things happen. It is at these points of the year in which the great > initiations take place, and the world becomes a better place. Each time I read these histories of the Solar Myth I do feel a bit out of place. I never saw the myth in terms of the position of our planet in relation with the Sun, what I think would be the correct perspective for a planetary vision. I say this because I am in the south hemisphere and here we just entered the "summer", and all the mythic histories of this kind sounds very weird from our location. In a given occasion, I was studying for a talk on "Sacred Seasons", grounded on Purucker work, and I got very confused in adapting the "seasons" for the south position. The account would become very interesting if we perceive that in December solstice the Earth is at the shortest distance of the Sun, next to the source of all life. So, the mythic insight is more reliable than an account from the south or north hemisphere point of view. Fraternal greetings and Merry Christmas to all! Osmar *8) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 11:35:20 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: Monads and World Chains As we study the core concepts of Theosophy, such as the seven principles, we quickly find that things do not fit together neatly, that there are things that may not seem quite right, that there seems to be many arbitrary distinctions and classifications. If we are not fortunate, we learn the words, and without truly exploring them, we become practiced in repeating them, but many seem hard to explain. We can repeat what we've read, but could not sit down and explain things in our own words, and give the meanings and purposes for the various ideas that we've been given. If, though, we've taken on our study directly, and treated the Teachings as worthy of our contemplation, we find that there is a wealth of things to consider. We get to a point where we think that we've really had a brilliant insight, and everything is falling neatly into place, when a new insight arives, throwing into disorder our neatly-arranged ideas. If our study has been on the Teachings, though, the disorder does not lead to arbitrary differences in our thinking, nor does it lead to eventual apathy, exhaustion, and an unwillingness to go further. The study, rather, leads to new and deeper levels of meaning that add new perspectives to what has been learned before. The order is reestablished, and it embraces what was there before, but something new is added, and there is a deeper level of understanding than before. What we find is that the established order of our thoughts is broken, fractured, thrown into disarray, then a new insight comes in, through the breaks or cracks. Then the order is established anew, with the now disconnected thoughts woven back together to include the new insight as an integral part of the new body of thought. Early in our study of the core concepts, we find that the same terms are used with different meanings. We only end up confused when we try to equate the different things spoken of under the same terms, and this confusion leads us to start, by necessity, to distinguish which idea is being spoken of, when a particuar term is used. This approach of teaching different things under the same words has many reasons. First, there is not a sufficient richness in language in English to describe the Mystery Teachings. Second, the terminology was borrowed from English and the various religions and philosophies of the world, and has not had centuries of fine tuning. Third, the esoteric truths are often presented under a blind, where an exoteric fact is presented, in order to divert attention from the genuine Msytery Teaching that is also being revealed. And fourth, the manner of teaching and training, proven to be the most effective over countless generations of teaching, is to force the student to learn from himself, to go beyond the words and gasp the ideas on his own initative, and we find ourselves doing this when we learn to pick out the meanings that are behind the words that we read. Consider the core teaching of the seven principles of man. Under the guise of the seven principles, there are a number of related but different Teachings that are being presented. One meaning has to do with the different planes and globes. The connection is that the activities of a particular globe, the characterictic behavior of the laws of nature on that globe, is under the influence of one of the principles. That principle predominates, out of it originates the activities of that globe. A second meaning has to do with the different selves within us. Each self has its own level of consciousness, and each self, in the composite nature of our constitutions, plays the role of initiating activities primarily from one of our principles. This deals with the Teaching of Monads, Egos, and Souls. A third meaning refers to the different influcences on us from the seven sacred planes. A fourth meaning refers to the elements or ingredients of consciousness, and has nothing to do with bodies or planes or worlds, but describes the fabric of consciousness itself. And a fifth meaning refers to the living substances out of which conscious existence is built up, the living attributes which we know as our skandhas. There are other meanings as well, it is not limited to five. All the meanings are different things, that are related, that can be compared by analogy or correspondence, but there is not a point-for-point identity between them. The principles may be described under one possible meaning, but really refer to an esoteric truth revealed under yet another meaning. Purucker, in his writings, is helpful, because he makes it clear that this method of teaching is being used, and he gives frequent hints that lead us to quite deep insights, and because he even goes to far as to explain how we are being taught. An especially good book to start with, after having read some of the introductory books, is his work "Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy". We must take care in our studies, to not grasp the words too tightly, or they may mislead us. We have to fill ourselves with the proper reverence of mind, and enter into the proper thought atmosphere, and we can get around the words and approach the actual teachings that are being presented to us. Besides the seven principles, other word teachings, exoteric doctrines we are presented are also rich with multiple meanings, and we shut ourselves out from most of them if we try to pick a single meaning for each term and leave it at that. Each globe of our planetary chain is a world on which the human ego is capable of existence. Each of these worlds is on a different plane or part of a plane. Globes C and E, for instance, are on the same plane, but C is on the lower part of its plane, and its life energies are directed downward, whereas Globe E is on the upper part of its plane, and its life energies are directed upwards. There is, then, both the actual worlds to experience different planes on, and a direction to the life energies, either downwards or upwards, depending upon whether the globes are on the downward arc (A, B, C, and a portion of D) or the upward arc (another portion of D, then E, F, and G). Some globes--depending upon which subplane they are on--are formless in nature, or are on planes of form. When we say *formless plane*, we are not talking about a plane where there are no objects, no forms, no shapes to things, and we are also not talking about planes where everything is amorphous, continually changing in shape. *Formless* refers to the requirement that a single form, or body, be present in and through which we exist as beings. We are not required to act simply through a body, but our effects on the forms of the world are made directly upon our surroundings. We still have a locality, and there still are things there, but we are not a thing or body ourselves. The purpose of the globe chain, then, is to provide places for us to exist on the different planes. On the globe chain, the various kingdoms of nature have their existences. These kingdoms range from the Elementals, through the Human and Dhyani-Chohanic. As a Monad progresses from one kingdom to the next, say from the Plant to the Animal Kingdoms, it is said to be the corresponding type of Monad, to be a Plant Monad, then an Animal Monad. The Monad itself is above manifestation, and is untouched by this progression through the kingdoms. It is its ray of consciousness, the Ego, that grows and evolves throught the kingdoms. So, in one sense, we could speak of a Monad with an animal Ego, then a Monad with a human Ego, rather than of an Animal Monad becoming a Human Monad. Speaking of it in different ways, though, allows us slightly different ways of thinking of it, and we need to avoid being locked into a single point of view or a single way of considering any of the Teachings! Considering us as Human Monads, on each of the globes, we have a personal or human Ego, each of a different type, each specifically evolved forth for that particular home. Each ego is composed of a karmic web of interactions established with the other beings that we know and have mixted destinies with that ego's globe. Even on the very highest globes, we have human Egos that belong to those globes. The nature of the Egos is different, though, and one cannot understand another. We go from one to the next by shifting our consciousness, by releasing the one ray of consciousness and entering into the other, by effectively becoming an entirely different self. But that self is us, is ourselves, as we have made ourselves on that other globe on which that self calls its home. Now there are higher ranges of being, vaster worlds than the globes of our planetary chain. They are not higher in quantity of physical mass or energy output. They are not suns, as compared to planets. The higher worlds are composed of bigger ranges of planes, a wider spectrum of the spaces of space. When we consider each globe being on a different plane, we could also consider all those planes as being subplanes of a yet bigger plane. And it is that bigger plane on which a single *globe* or world of a greater chain would exist. To distinguish between these *globes* and what we commonly know to be the globes, we could use the term *world*, and speak of *world chains*. All the globes of the earth planetary chain exist on subplanes of a single plane, on which a single world, in a world chain exists. This does not mean that such a world is a composite plane, consisting of seven or twelve globes somehow pasted together. It is a single place, a single world, but the range of consciousness that it embraces includes everything that our entire globe chain encompasses. Any of our globes has a laya center that leads inwards and upwards to one such world. The connection is analogous to the different lower human or personal Egos that we have on the globes, each with a link within to the higher self, the higher human Ego, which has a consciousness that spans the globe chain. This *world* is the home of the Planetaries. When we speak of them as spanning the globes in their consciousness, it is just that: spanning in consciousness, which is the range or extent of consciousness in this higher world. It is not spanning in the sense of running back and forth, from one globe to the next, as visiting the globes. When we speak of the Spiritual Monad having a wider range of consciousness than the Human Monad, and the Divine Monad a still wider range, we are talking about the planes that their *worlds* or theaters of existence take in. One such grand range, for instance, includes the Universal Solar System, which reaches far beyond what we know of as our solar system, far more than our visible sun and the planets that we know it to have. When we enter a *world*, leaving beind the globe chain, we have departed existence on all the globes of the chain. We have not raced through the globes, from one to the next, and we have not merely transferred ourselves to a higher globe. We have left behind all the globes, and could later emerge into existence on a particular globe, though our human Ego that corresponds to that globe. Considering our existence on the globe chain, we cycle through the seven or twelve globes, making a complete circuit of the planes. All the kingoms of nature, including the Dhyani Chohanic as well, as Monads, go through the globes in succession, as their life waves sweep along during the seven Rounds. For each globe, regardless of our kingdom, we have an Ego that is especially evolved forth for that globe. We have a different self waiting for us on each of these globes or planes that we visit. This is true be we Elemental Monads, or even Dhyani-Chohanic Monads. Note, though, the word *Monads*. It represents a certain stage of development, a stage ligher than Atoms, but lesser than Gods. The higher level to existence, as Gods, involves interaction with the *world* behind the globes of our chain, and involves the Outer Rounds, where we visit other planets. The atoms stay put, on a single globe. The Monads circle the globes. And the Gods visit higher *worlds*. The Gods have a greater range of experience, and do rounds of the planets. But Dhyani Chohanic Monads are not yet Gods, and still are part of the monadic kingdoms. They still have Egos for each of the globes, and visit them in succession. One problem, as we go further in our exploration of the Wisdom Tradition, is that the more we uncover, the more we have left unexplained. The more we explore an subject, the less neatly wrapped up it is. The deeper our penetration into the Teachings, the more unanswered questions that we have. It is a never ending process, that results not in confusion and bewilderment, but rather in an on-going dialog with one's inner teacher and in a broadening and deepening of ones ties with the spiritual. We have to be willing to throw aside or upturn our well-ordered thinking many times as we go over and contemplate the Teachings. These upheavals can almost be expected as a regular experience, almost periodic in nature, if we are turn to our studies, and following the right course. This refashioning of our thoughts, this ever-expanding change to our thought life, is not just changes in our thoughts, but also changes in our self-nature, both of which are Manas, that which makes us unique as individuals and distinct from others. We broaded and uplift and evolve our thought life, and we have raised ourselves as well. When we have our theosophical thoughts too nicely organized, too neatly compartmentalized, too thoroughtly defined, we will find ourselves out of touch with our inner teacher, apart from the thought current of the Mysteries, adrift without our spiritual anchor. We need to avoid the molds of mind, we need to give new, different, fresh expression to our inner natures, we need to shake loose of any too-rigid thought lest it become a barrier to thinking! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 15:15:05 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: HPB's "Psychology" Jerry Hejka-Ekins > The quote you give here defines psychology as: > > "an elucidation of the relation existing between spirit and > matter, which relation demonstrates as consciousness." > > However Bailey wants to define psychology is OK with me. > But this is not the understanding of the word in the 1880's, and > is not how H.P.B. uses the term. For "consciousness," HPB uses > the term "consciousness." For "psychology" HPB uses the term > "psychology." Can you show me a quote from HPB that does > otherwise? As I was reading SD Book I Part III (Science and SD Contrasted) Ch XV on 'Gods, Monads, Atoms' I came across the following towards the middle of this chapter (p.620 of the original facsimile edition of SD): "...And once it is forced by its enemies - Metaphhysics and Psychology*..." And there was the following footnote: "* Let not the word psychology cause the reader to carry the thought by an association of ideas to modern "Psychologists", whose idealism is another name for uncompromising materialism, and whose pretended Monism is no better than a mask to conceal the void of final annihilation - even of consciousness. Here Spiritual psychology is meant." IMHO, this at the very least hints at HPB's awareness of 'psychology' in its esoteric sense, the sense in which DK has used it in the AAB books. > As for why some Theosophists don't like Bailey, I have a >theory on this, and may have the evidence to support it by the >time I get back. I don't think the objection has anything to do >with "astral channeling." In fact, I don't think the real reason >has ever been published. More on this later. I look forward to hearing more on this from you. I hope to also reply to a previous message to you later on, and will give the reference to Krishnamurthy being overshadowed by the Christ therein. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 15:38:56 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Humor etc. > from Nancy > You folks are much more productive than I, I can hardly keep up > with the mail, so if I have missed this reference, please excuse me > I have recently come across a small book/pamphlet called > THE PSEUDO OCCULT OF MRS. A. BAILEY by Cleather and Crump > published in 1929 in Manila. Have you already discussed this? I read about this 'pamphlet' in a monograph which I got from Daniel Caldwell, but when I asked him for a copy of it, he did not have any. Can you send me a copy of it via mail (I'll be glad to pay for all expenses and effort) at the following address: A. Kumar 3024 Landershire Lane Plano TX 75023-800824 Thank you very much. > Is there any interest in metaphysical humor? We are certainly > a serious group. Yes, it will be great to have occasional humor, and let me start the ball rolling by reproducing in my own words a joke I recently saw on another bulletin board: "There are three kinds of people. Those who can count, and those who cannot." Hope to hear more jokes and funny stuff from you and others. Best Wishes From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 16:21:52 -0500 From: eldon@raider.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM Subject: Seven Principles as Conscious Spectrum When we study the seven principles of man, we hear them described in a number of different ways. Their names will vary, and which of them are considered actually to be principles will differ from one description to the next. Does this mean that one description is more true than the others, that one enumeration is better than the next? No. It means that to illustrate a certain point, one might be used, and to illustrate another point, a different one used. Some enumerations may be given at first, and others later on, because the later ones deal with more difficult concepts, with ideas that require a greater preparation. One typical list of the seven principles would go: Atman - spirit - supreme self Buddhi - soul - wisdom or insight Manas - mind - knowledge Kama - animal - desire Prana - life - life energy Linga Sharira - astral - senses Sthula Sharira - physical - body We say with the above "one typical", because there are variations on this list. And each such variation may have some purpose to it, some concept that it seeks to illustrate. One variation is that Manas is really two principles, Buddhi-Manas and Kama-Manas. Another is that Shtula Sharira is not really a principle of consciousness, because it is a form and not a type of self or awareness. And a third is that Atman is not really a principle, because it is universal, contained by all, the same for every creature in the entire universe, and not at all personal or unique to us. When we want to take the standpoint of there being a fixed, eternal, supreme self in us, we'd take the standpoint of Atman being the highest, the topmost *manifest* principle of consciousness. We would enumerate our principles as starting with Atman, as originating out of this great Self. Consider, though, Buddhism, which teaches us that there is no fixed, permanent, immutable Self, but rather an eternal stream of consciousness. This idea, combined with the idea of emptiness or sunyata, leads us to a different possible breakdown: Auric Egg - essence of being Buddhi - wisdom or insight Buddhi-Manas - higher mind Kama-Manas - personal mind Kama - desire Prana - life energy Linga Sharira - senses This shows our consciousness as arising out of an ever-changing essence of being, a repository of our experience that makes up our essential natures. There is no fixed Self in this enumeration. Now which one is true? Do we have an essential Self, or are we without self of any kind? The answer is that both are true. It depends upon the *mode* that we are functioning in, as to which experience of life that we partake of. There are actually three modes, and these are the three kayas, the nirmanakaya, where there is a fixed self, the sambhogakaya, where there is no fixed self, but is an existence of total loss of self in the situation we find ourselves in, and the dharmakaya, where there is no fixed self, nor awareness of any particular situation. It would depend, then, upon the mode of consciousness that we are functioning, as to the apparent nature of reality to us at that time, and the corresponding breakout of our principles. The principles all come forth from within, one after the other in succession, but which ones are appear to us depends upon how our consciousness is functioning. Some may appear to be missing due to our mode of consciousness, some may be missing due to not having acquired self-consciousness in us, and some may not be directly knowable due to the nature of the world that we exist in. There is much of the higher principles that will have to remain unknowable to us, as fourth Round, Globe D, human Egos. There is a general correspondence between the principles and the planes of consciousness, and the spaces of space, but only loosely so with the globes themselves. The globes do not correspond to the principles, but have a passing association with them. The globes, over time, over the time period of planetary manvantaras, rise to higher planes, and possible associate with different principles. Globe D of a globe chain, corresponds to the lowest being in an association of great Monads, it is a Being of a quite grand scale. It functions as the lowest of a sutratman or golden chain of selves, and it is the constitution or embodied nature of these selves that makes up our planetary chain. On each globe, our corresponding human Ego has its seven principles, including its Manas, or thought, which is of a nature that takes in understanding of the subplane that its globe spans over. On a greater scale, our higher human Ego, or even higher, our spiritual Ego, has its seven principles, including its Manas, but that Manas is of a nature that takes in an understanding that spans a much bigger plane than that of any any globe. Our physical bodies, senses, vital natures, desires, thought life, and spiritual natures are all composed of the substances of the mother nature which we know, that of Globe D, and what we have made ourselves is based upon what we have evolved forth from these materials. As we evolved, we gradually establish our seat of consciousness in higher and higher principles within, until we bring back that treasure called self-consciousness into our unmanifest, our true inner natures. There are higher schemes of existence, above and beyond what we know in the planetary chain. As we circuit the globes of the chain, we participate in the inner rounds, and participate in the current scheme. As we rise higher within, we can leave it behind, and participate in bigger circuits, bigger cycles of existence, bigger Rounds called the outer rounds. We have higher Egos that the lower human or personal Ego. Each Ego has its own type of world, its own place of existence, its own, greater scope of consciousness or plane to exist on. This bigger existence is not in terms of number of worlds on which to exist, not bigger in quantity, but rather bigger in the sense of containing more *in space.* No Ego is eternal in an absolute sense, not even the divine. Each is a ray of its respective Monad, and is *eternal* only in the sense of existing for *an* eternity, for the duration of the world in which it exists, for an manvantara of its own particular world, be it a planetary or solar manvantara, or something still grander. Now although we have a unqiue set of seven principles for our human Ego on this earth, on globe D, the higher principles do not act directly on the physical world. Each principle acts through the ones below it, and the highest cannot affect earth life without a developed intermediate nature to express them. This is why, for instance, that an Avatara needs the intermediate nature of a Buddha, the Buddha's Buddhi-Manas, as well as that of an high Mahatma, his Kama-Manas, as well as a physical body through which to act. An Avatara, with no evolved Globe D human Ego to act through, cannot appear without the *loan* of the already-evolved intermediate nature of highly developed humans. The physical form itself, combined with sense perception and animating life energies, is but an empty shell, without some sense of self, of relatedness to life, and of volition or desire to do good in the world. Our principles, in one sense, are like the colors that the spectrum of light can be broked out into. Taking a prism, we can see apparently white light breaking apart into a series of colors, from the invisible, from one color to the next, ending with the invisible again. We could pick certain specific places on the spectrum and say that these are distinct *colors*, and the rest are a combination of them. But the selection could also be made at different points, with a different set of colors arrived at. Both sets of colors would be true, but either would be a generalization of sorts. Why are our principles typically broken out into seven or ten? Because of the seven-fold nature of manifest life, or the ten-fold or even twelve-fold nature of complete life, we find that nature patterns itself after than number. Our knowledge, and those of even the highest Dhyani-Chohans, knowledge based upon personal experience and the penetrating sight of spiritual vision, does not go beyond our solar system. We cannot say that life takes on a seven-, ten-, or twelve-fold beyond what is known, we cannot say that there aren't cycles of different numbers beyond our corner of the universe. We can, though, say that the numbers we use are key in the understanding of the inner workings of nature and of the inner side of life. They provide us with a numerical key to unlocking some of the Mystery Teachings. The reason that we have a seven-fold nature to manifest life, is not that there are precisely seven principles to man, no more that could we say that there are precisely seven colors to the spectrum. The division is to an extent arbitrary. The reason that seven is used is illustrated in the fact that there are seven globes to a manifest globe chain, *seven discrete places to visit* on the planes. We have a manifest cycle of seven because there are seven places to visit or steps or stages to the cyclic nature of our world, and not because consciousness itself has a hard-and-fast division into seven. Consciousness is wave-like, and more like a spectrum than like any discrete object. It manifests in and through developed Egos, and is limited in expression because of them. We could take a spectral analysis, breaking apart the light from an object, and from the varying spectrum determine what elements were in the object, with their characteristic wavelengths. We could also break apart the stream of consciousness in an individual, and determine what Egos it was composed of. The important thing to consider is that consciousness, per se, is not an object, not a substance, not a body, not a world, but rather is composed of intrinsic aspects of *being*, essential components of any manifest entity, and follows an universal pattern that is exprienced throughout existence. Regardless of how grand a scale, we are capable of realizing and making a conscious part of ourselves of all of our principles, even as we continue to exist as Globe D human Egos. This includes an appreciation and awareness of the spiritual and divine side to life, which can be ever-present in the activities of the day, apart from any hatha yoga, physical cultivation, or brain-mind study that we may engage in. We can make the highest parts of ourselves a living part of our conscious stream of light, adding, so to say, the higher end of the spectrum to our light, and the only limit to what we can accomplish is that which we set for ourselves. Our biggest obstacle is our own self-defined limits! Let us free our minds and hearts from the bondage of the material world and worlds which we are compelled to be reborn into. Let us dwell deeply within, in our essential nature and being, going into the quiet, still place of silence at the core of our being that is untouched by outer things. Let us not just go there, but realize that it is an essential part of our conscious existence too, and is already present in our lives, awaiting but own attention in order to be made self-conscious! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 16:44:41 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Dhyan Chohans etc. Jerry S. Here are some follow-up thoughts on your response to my questions. Best Regards > Arvind. I would not go so far as to say that "all disease > happens on the mental or astral levels first." Ken Wilber wrote > an excellent article last year in New Age Magazine about this > saying that this belief leads to guilt and doesn't help anyone > very much. He also gives examples where it isn't true. For > example, if you become exposed to radioactive material, you can > get cancer no matter how "good" your thinking is. Of course, I > believe that karma must be added to the equation somewhere as > well. The fact is, you can get disease from physical causes and > not just from mental or astral causes. But, perhaps, this itself > is your karma? I think this may be 'semantics'. Karma itself is generated on the mental plane (by thoughts) and not on the physical plane, at least that is my understanding. The physical plane can be regarded as an effect rather than a cause only by making the assumption that no physical action by itself is the cause of further action; exposure to radio-active material causing disease (in the example that you give) may be due to (a) Previous Karma and (b) wrong expectancy (negative thoughts result in negative results). > You seem to be confusing the planes in what you said. "Does this > mean that I have already sent this message on the Astral, or > (hopefully) Mental plane?" Yes. You sent it out on the mental > plane when you thought it. "Does this discussion group exist on > the Mental plane?" Let me answer by saying that all of our minds > exist on the mental plane and nowhere else. Only our physical > bodies are located on and limited to Globe D on the physical > plane. It will be great to participate in this group activity on the mental plane, in full consciousness of the mental plane (surroundings etc.)! I see your point that we are constantly experiencing mental plane activity/ communication without realizing it as such. > Our "true nature" is not a "Dhayan" Chohan. As we evolve, we > will progress from the human kingdom to that of the Dhyani > Chohans (who reside above the lower four cosmic planes), but that > will be as illusive as the human and animal and all of the rest. > I firmly believe that we are, in our very inner essence, a divine > monad - a spark of divinity. All of the other monads that > theosophical literature talks about are temporary and > mayavic. For example, we have a "human monad," but this is only > on Globe D and thus it is temporary and will dissipate like mist > on the day that we recognise our true nature. Our true nature is > divine, which is one step up from the spiritual. We have a monad > on each cosmic plane, but only the divine is eternal and > infinite, the others all being its expression. Another abstruse subject. Over the weekend, I read ch XI Part III Book I of HPB's SD, and starting on p. 571 (original facsimile edition) there is a lot given on Dhayan Chohans and Monads. Here is a reproduction from p. 619 of the same reference: "The Monads (Jivas) are the Souls of the Atoms, both are the fabric in which the Chohans (Dhyanis, gods) cloth themselves when a form is needed (Eastern Catechism)." I also enjoyed reading Eldon's comments in "A beautiful Picture Emerging" on this. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 23:09:53 -0500 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: globes and microcosm This is by Brenda Tucker. Nancy: One of my favorite activities is attending T.S. programs. You must have some very interesting Friday evening programs and perhaps some occasional additional programs, talks, debates, or seminars. Do you attend these programs regularly? Is there any possibility of getting short (or long) reports on the events held in Pasadena that you do attend? I could reminisce about old times and it might be useful to some of the other network participants in planning programs of their own. One of my favorite forums is to have scientists like Itzhak Bentov, Ravi Ravindra, or Fritjof Capra, even Delores Krieger prompted to discussion of topics by a philosopher like Renee Weber. She could always seem to direct their attention to relevant and interesting topics, and perhaps even turn around and answer a few of the issues raised by scientists. Once they had a Jewish author, a Christian writer and lecturer, and a third representative.(?) The Jewish fellow became so angered that he left the platform. The one and only time I attended a Pasadena library talk there was an educated woman from the community speaking so well that I thought she surely must have made a name for herself, and that I was unfortunate for not knowing her work better. Would something like program reports be something you'd like and be able to do? Jerry S.: I LOVED your paragraph on Monads. Hurrah! Eldon and other people out here in California have Monaded me to death. However, what I believe to be lacking in your exposition of the globes is not quotes to substantiate your thesis, but more MEANING. All of your principles and planes just amount to WHAT? What do kingdoms of nature mean? What do races mean? All of this is highlighted by the doctrine of the planetary chains. You say that each globe has seven principles, but each of the globes in the planetary chain is one of the seven principles. Eldon doesn't agree, because he says that two are on the same plane, but if you look at the chart on p. 153 Vol I THE SECRET DOCTRINE, you'll see that the Human Principles are pictured the same way, two to a plane. Doesn't this emphasize that the planetary chain's existence is similar and that the downward arc utilizes the Upadhi side, and the upward arc emphasizes the ensouling life side. Only in the physical body, the Upadhi of all the others, are all of the seven principles acting as one. It's fun that you found the quote remarking that "Atma is no principle." Well, here's one that says the body is no principle, so what is truth? P. 616 Vol II THE SECRET DOCTRINE "We answer that there are, in fact, only six principles in man; since his body is NO PRINCIPLE, but the covering, the shell thereof. So with the PLANETARY CHAIN; speaking of which, esoterically, the Earth (as well as the seventh, or rather FOURTH plane, one that stands as the seventh if we count from the first triple kingdom of the Elementals that begin the formation) may be left out of consideration, being (to us) the only distinct body of the seven." Others: Worlds do not refer to globes in the planetary chain, and neither do sacred planets refer to globes in the planetary chain. The seven races on earth repeat, in a sense, the activity of the globes to a degree and in this same regard, man wasn't even physical until he reached the fourth race, (See chart on p. 688 Vol II, THE SECRET DOCTRINE) but as we are fifth race man, we would be equated with the fifth globe in the series, the globe on the astral plane. Does this mean that we lost our physical bodies? No. But perhaps because in each round we approach more fully the goal of evolution and it won't be until the fifth round that we are completely able to touch down physically during the fourth root race and then manifest in the sense that I (for one) just desire, which is to be an ascended being who is not obeisant to the law of reincarnation, but one who more fully manifests his soul qualities and characteristics in conjunction with the work of the adepts. In the next round, humanity won't be spending their fifth race in physical existence. In fact, it is possible for many people today to take that great initiation that clothes them in bodies which were more fully made for the manifestation of their soul energies, love mainly. As we continue to strive to love and purify humanity, we are more and more closely drawn to the hierarchy of adepts who may then direct our charging of the atmosphere of earth with the qualities which set mankind free from human limitations. What will happen with the sixth root race, will physical generation continue or will mankind have achieved its goal for the fifth round, fifth race, and exist in this mysterious, ascended way, and whose soul presence can still be felt on the physical plane? "This esotericism is the common property of all, and belongs neither to the Aryan 5th Race, nor to any of its numerous Sub-races. It cannot be claimed by the Turanians, so-called, the Egyptians, Chinese, Chaldeans, nor any of the Seven divisions of the Fifth Root Race, but really belongs to the Third and Fourth Root Races, whose descendants we find in the Seed of the Fifth, the earliest Aryans." (THE SECRET DOCTRINE Vol I, 113) I thought this might be interesting for a possible naming of the first four subraces and was wondering if anyone else had an idea what the subraces of the Fifth Root Race are. "Their Rishis and gods, their Demons and Heroes, have historical and ethical meanings, and the Aryans never made their religion rest solely on physiological symbols, as the old Hebrews have done. This is found in the exoteric Hindu Scriptures. That these accounts are blinds is shown by their contradicting each other, a different construction being found in almost every Purana and epic poem. Read esoterically they will all yield the same meaning. Thus one account enumerates Seven worlds, exclusive of the nether worlds, also seven in number; these fourteen upper and nether worlds have nothing to do with the classification of the septenary chain and belong to the purely aethereal, invisible worlds. These will be noticed elsewhere. Suffice for the present to show that they are purposely referred to as though they belonged to the chain. "Another enumeration calls the Seven worlds earth, sky, heaven, middle region, place of birth, mansion of the blest, and abode of truth; placing the 'Sons of Brahm' in the sixth division, and stating the fifth, or Jana Loka, to be that where animals destroyed in the general conflagration are born again." (Vol I 115-116 SD) I liked this quote because it made me think how the Hebrews are doing such a wonderful service in stressing the physiological, phallic, or sexual side of life. The reason I state this is that while "historical and ethical" "Demons and Heroes" seem to have a more purposeful place in the differentiation of ONENESS, it doesn't help life on an upward arc to be so torn apart by who has done what. We were all created, we have all manifested, we have faced the trials in life, and now for the return arc we are approaching oneness. We need this emphasis on the physiological and away from the metaphysical because the great stories manifesting in physical existence in the fourth race are complete. What can unify us? What can lead us on the return to oneness? THE SECRET DOCTRINE (p.112 Vol I) speaks of the "three strides of Vishnu," which are explained as being the various positions of the sun, rising, noon, and setting. "the Zohar laid it down very philosophically and comprehensively. It is said and plainly demonstrated therein that in the beginning the Elohim (Alhim) were called Ehad, "one," or the "Deity is one in many," a very simple idea in a pantheistic conception" "Then came the change, 'Jehovah is Elohim,' thus unifying the multiplicity and taking the first step towards Monotheism." (p.113) "Stepping out of the Circle of Infinity...becomes "One" ... then he (or it) is transformed by evolution into the One in many, ... the Elohim,... his third Step being taken into the generation of the flesh, or 'Man.' And from man, or Yah-Havah, "male-female," the inner divine entity becomes, on the metaphysical plane, once more the Elohim. The Kabalistic idea is identical with the Esotericism of the Archaic period." Some other fun thoughts: It IS only the mediaeval Kabalists who, following the Jewish and one or two Neo-Platonists, applied the term Microcosm to man. Ancient philosophy called the Earth the_Microcosm of the Macrocosm, and man the outcome of the two. (THE SECRET DOCTRINE Vol I p. 284) The invisible Deity is thus also the Dhyan Chohans, or the Rishis, the primitive seven, and the nine, without, and ten, including, their synthetical unit; from which IT steps into Man. (Vol I, 114) Well, that's enough for now. Happy New Year to all. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 09:51:47 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: please explain Dear Eldon, I may not be well qualified to say why some folks dislike my work so much, but I'll try. First and foremost, it's a sacrilege for anyone, no matter who, to identify the Masters as historical figures, no matter whom. Why? Because there's a whole myth built around access to them being restricted to the spiritually deserving. For some obscure librarian doing detective work research to crack any of the secrets is disturbing to that mindset. Second, the HPB who emerges in my research is up to her neck in political coalitions and intrigues, although finding herself on opposite sides at various times. This is sacrilegious to those who see HPB and the Masters as completely above political concerns. Others can add more points, but I would say that the general sloppiness of presentation in ISM did not help my case much, or the sweeping generalizations from limited evidence that are found there. The new book is much more oriented to just presenting the lives of the characters and the evidence of Theosophical connections, without speculation about whys and wherefores. Jerry's "nutshell" gives a seriously distorted summary of my work. I have never suggested that everything HPB said about the Masters was a cover story, but rather that she liberally combined truth with "blinds" in order to protect their identities. As for reducing everything to Sufi sources, this is preposterous. Only two of the thirty-three characters in the new book are Sufis; Punjabi Sikhs, whom Jerry says I specifically reject as IDs for Masters, in fact are the largest single category (and were in ISM as well). Of the 33, 11 are Indian, 4 Russian, 3 English, 2 each American and Egyptian, and 1 each Hungarian, Polish, Persian, Cypriot, Spanish, Algerian, Sikkimese Sinhalese and Tibetan. So there's absolutely no attempt to say the Masters were all one kind of person ethnically or religiously. I use lots of HPB material as genuine accounts of the Masters, rather than rejecting all as fiction. One final note as to why this is disturbing to folks. Approaches to HPB have always been dominated by the assumption that she either never lied or never told the truth. My approach assumes that she did both, plentifully, and it is up to us to sort it all out. The fact that this is hard work and places responsibility on our own shoulders makes it tempting to just reject this approach and cling to the idea that HPB always told the truth or always lied. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 10:09:58 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: Existence in Astral Light and on Globes Apart from one's body, asleep or in trance, we are faced with the question of where and what we are. Are we on another plane of consciousness? Are we still on Globe D? Are we the same people that we are, but just apart from our bodies, or something different, something more? And do we experience enhanced consciousness, or a degree of loss of consciousness, in the process? Consider when we sleep, and dream. Is our consciousness in the body? No. We are not conscious of the body, generally speaking, but are experiencing something different. It is possible to still pay a bit of attention to the body, like sitting upright in a chair or with crossed legs in meditative posture; it is possible to lend some attention to the body so that it stays in position. Despite this, though, our primary focus of awareness is, for the time, in our dream experience. During the dream, there is a definite reaction upon the body. Various physiological changes happen, including a period rapid eye movements. When the dream is over, the rhythms of the body change as well. What we basically have, in sleep and dreaming, is a stilling of the body, and a shifting of the senses away from it, elsewhere on our globe, to perceive things on the astral light. The objectivity of what we perceive depends upon how *close* the images are to actual beings and happenings in the world. Something far removed from the actual world is tremendously subjective, primarily based upon our own consciousness, and with little karma-making interaction with others. In a dream, we learn to experience the Globe D world with our senses directly, apart from our bodies, and because we are untrained in the experience, we cannot reliably depend upon what we perceive. Because of the subjectivity of the experiences, we see and find things to be as we would expect them, based upon our prior beliefs. If we were to think, for instance, that Mars and Mercury were part of the earth chain, we may see them as such--even though they are not!--and we would not have any way of knowing that we were wrong in our perceptions. Likewise, if we expected to see the structure of other worlds to follow a certain pattern, our expectations would be fulfilled, and we would feel gratified to find that our beliefs were true, since they appeared to be confirmed by our personal experiences. The problem is that someone else, with entirely different beliefs, would also find their beliefs confirmed by their experiences as well. Who is right? The general term for the substance out of which our world is condenced is the astral light. It has a range of materiality, from the most elemental and root substance, Akasha, out of which the higher globes are formed, down through various grades until it reaches the type of stuff out of which our physical plane matter is formed. And that is not the bottom to things! It goes even more material, beyond our ability to follow it downwards, just as it goes even more refined, as we trace it upwards towards its root nature. The nature of the experience in the dream world, in the astral realms that surround our physical earth, in the psychical atmosphere of our Globe D, is entire mayavic. That is, it is so easily subject to misunderstanding, and so readily does it fashion itself to match the contents of our personalities and our expectations, that only a trained chela might make proper sense out of it. We can have a good time, and can have all sorts of experiences, some of a kamalokic nature, perhaps, and others more nearly devachanic in nature. But we are not in an truly objective world, and as we move away from the atmosphere of the physical earth, as we move away from fully-manifest life, we begin to lose awareness, to become sleepier in our consciousness, to be more and more disconnected from life. As we pull away from the earth with our psychical senses, we are separating from the other Monads in our constitution, and withdrawing into ourselves, and following the process, to a certain degree, of dropping out of existence, of leaving the seven principles behind. Were this process carried through to completion, we'd eventually end up reappearing as a human Ego on Globe E, but we aren't really ready for this, and can only go partway. Given the illusive nature of astral experience, how, then, can we tell if we are in the astral atmosphere of our earth, or really on another globe? What are the differences in experience, and what can we use as guidelines in our distinguishing between the two? When in the astral light, when still in the atmosphere of Globe D, we have a connection to all of our seven principles of this globe, including the Sthula Sharira, the physical body. There is a physiological basis for experiences here. Rapid eye movements during dreaming shows that connection. There is a sense of instability to the experience, an awareness that a strong burst of feelings or too intensely concentrating one's mind on what is happening would wake one up. On the other hand, when on another globe, we are in a different self, a different personal or lower human Ego for that globe, and memories of the experiences on that globe do not carry back to our personalities. It is only in the individuality that any experiences are remembered, since it is a higher self that the one that only spans a specific globe. We are, at the time, then, in dreamless sleep of which we have no personal memories. It could not be otherwise, since we as personalities do not have any established relationships nor connections with the other beings of another globe. Those relationships represent both our karma and our connections with others. We as personalities do not and cannot exist on other globes, for the personalities are woven out of the fabric of a globe itself, including its own unique attributes and inhabitants. On another globe, there is a sense of reality, as much so as we experience in our waking state here on Globe D. There is a sense of immutable law. There is a prevading sense of reality that "this is the way that things are." The order of things seems so well-adjusted, so naturally to fit together, so well structured, that we could not possibly conceive of another world in which the laws of nature functioned differently. External laws govern what happen, and we cannot alter things and make exceptions to how things will happen based upon what we would like. Everything behaves in a manner that is hard as rock, immovable, always following Law, consistent and unsympathetic to our personal wishes. Try as hard as we might, we cannot change things, except through our interaction with others, and following *process*, the pathways of change laid out for us for the particular mother nature of that world. Life on another globe has a feeling of immovability. There is an emmence inertia to things. There is a sense of things being solid, concrete, and subject to limitation. We have a sense of belonging, although it is not necessarily one of harmony. There are situations in life where animals, for instance, prey on smaller animals. There are both constructive and destructive karmic relationships with others on that globe. On this globe, we have participated in its co-creation, and thereby defined and created our personal selves. We interact with the environment, and it is responsive to a certain extent, but it is not fashioned and created out of ourselves, like dreams are, but rather is populated--from our standpoint--through our karmic ties to other beings. Our minds contain a vast storehouse of thought and memory. And at any moment, there is a narration going on, a mental narrator giving voice to our thought of the moment. Associated with this narration is a stream or sequence of images, which apart from the body in sleep we experience directly. This stream of images continues during the day as well, as we are awake, but we are generally unaware of it. During sleep, when the body is at rest, we experience this stream of images as thought it were a real sequence of events. It is our own creation, but it seems real for the moment. It is affected to the state of the body, and affected by any drug or illness that we may be experiencing, since all the seven principles affect the others. It is only apart from the human Ego and all the associated seven principles, away from globe D, that what happens to the physical body does not impact our experiences. We are capable of creating and populating a world in our own mind, and it is our own elementals that often populate our dreams. The flexibility of circumstances in dreams is due to no others being present to oppose our will, we completely rule what happens. Although this is the general case for dreams, this is not to say that the only beings on Globe D are those that have physical bodies. There are some beings that exist near the earth, dwelling in its atmosphere, in and around the astral light out of which our globe is formed. They either did not have sufficient karmic ties with others in life to come yet into birth, or are too different in nature from *what can be* at this time. When we would have a dream go a certain way, and we push on dream-world surroundings, they are what *pushes back* and offers resistance rather than going along with us. In the astral, we can have an experience where we make a try at creation without coming into full existence. We exist in our higher principles of the human Ego, and rather than completely clothing ourselves in the lower ones of a globe, we direct those life energies into making a fantasy world for ourselves, a place of make-believe. The lower form of this experience would be to make ourselves a kamaloka. The higher form would make us a devachan. This type of experience includes many kinds of dream, although not all experiences called dreams are the same. As we distance ourselves from the earth, moving away in the astral light, our sense of personality and personal self-consciousness fades, since its intrinsic nature is derived from and build up from its living bonds with other lives of the earth. When we are in very close proximity to the earth, we see the physical world. Somewhat removed from the earth, objects and dream circumstances closely fashion themselves after "real" ones. Even farther removed, objects take on wider latitude in what happens as our own will *creates* rather than *interacts* or co-creates them. When we are not in interaction with the world, we create and populate everything about us--not very well, though--and there are generally no other beings behind the forms we create except our own elementals. We have really withdrawn our lower principles from the world, but are still dwelling in them in a way. This has to do with another subject, regarding clothing ourselves in seven principles outside, as opposed to inside a world, a subject that would lead us away from the current discussion. When we leave the body and exist somewhere else, it's not as simple as to say that we now are on another plane, with such-and-such inhabitants. There is no *world*, in a sense, for disembodied men, animals, plants, etc. There are other worlds for embodied men, etc., to exist on, but no world for full existence without all the principles, including the Sthula Sharira, since they are essential ingredients of a full consciousness. Picture the sun coming up in the morning. Its light outshines all the stars and heavenly bodies. Its warmth and energy brings us life. It brings us life, and is like the presence of the great being whose existence brings about our Globe D in the astral light. Now imagine the sun greatly dimmed, perhaps at a great distance. We are in silence, darkness. The light of other worlds can be perceived, but they too are far away, and not places that we can visit. Picture ourselves far from the sun, at the far outskirts of the solar system. It is dark, cold, and there is but a dim light from the distant sun. Its weak influence is hardly felt, and in the vacuum of empty space, we clearly see the stars about us, we sense the other stars but are not affected by them. As we move beyond a certain point, we reach the dissolution of solar matter, where is breaks down into interstellar substance, out of which we can make or fashion what happens through our own will. This visual image is an analogy, a poetical metaphor, and can help us picture what happens in moving away from Globe D, but must not be carried too far. When we leave the body, we can stay on this plane, and move away in the astral light from our globe. We can also go on to another globe and have full embodiment on it, clothing ourselves in our seven principles of that globe. We are not, though, limited to visiting the other globes *in full consciousness.* We can have an experience of the consciousness of a plane, through visiting a globe on it, without having to have embodied existence on that globe. We can clothe ourselves just in the higher triad on that globe, and have an experience of selfhood and pure thought. Deep in meditation, apart from any desire to interact with beings on such a plane and apart from any sensory connection to the objects that exist there, we can experience the nature of the plane by dwelling in our mind and essential self on that globe. We can take on Atman, Buddhi, and Manas on the globe, and experience pure consciousness of its respective plane without engaging in activity with its inhabitants. When we take up full existence on the other globe, and take on all our seven principles, we find a pervasive sense of reality, something bigger than ourselves. We are under the influence of a great being that brings the world into existence. There is an incredible complexity and diversity to things, but they all have their own intrinsic natures as well, and are not subject to change based upon our immediate wants. We have a sense of self, of personality, which is a karmic web that is woven out of our personal connections established with others on that globe. Without this karmic web, we have and are nothing, and could not exist. There is a recognition by us and other lives that this, the globe, is a very important place to be, that it is a very important state to have, that here is where we really should be, here is where the action is. As human Egos, our world, Globe D, is not just an important place to be, it is the only place that we can be. Our existence and very being is build up out of our connectedness with others on this globe. It is not *us* that travels to another globe. Rather, we enter into a different *us* on those globes. When *we* go onto Globe E, for instance, we enter into another human Ego, the one we have evolved forth for that globe, and have for the moment left behind the human Ego of Globe D. The globes, then, are places where life and manifestation happens. They are *meeting places* where Monads come into existence and share the experience of being alive. They are places of karma and causality, and places where Egos, rays of consciousness from the Monad, can be evolved forth, and self-consciousness attained. The subject, although quite simple on the surface, as one might initially think from looking at a diagram of a globe chain in "The Secret Doctrine", is actually bottomless, without an end to it, and like the other theosophical doctrines, it can be explored and taken as far as we choose, where the only limit to how far we can go is ourselves! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 11:59:05 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: HPB telling lies Paul J.: Some may want the Masters to be like the gods of Mt. Olympus, with incredible non-physical powers. To them, any historic information about the actual people that where Masters, showing some element of humanity to them, would be rejected. It's a natural psychological mechanism to reject things inconsistent with one's worldview, to filter out any information from the outer world that would force one to review and possibly change his beliefs. There may be historic information about the Masters that would be inconsistent with some beliefs, and it would be ignored or denied. It would seem reasonable to assume that HPB would protect the identity of the Masters, and possibly use blinds or be ambiguous or misleading in what she said about their actual personages, in order to shield them from public scrunity. When you say that HPB both told the truth and lied, you need to define first what you mean by "lie". What did she say, or in what manner did she say things that were not true? She may have hidden things under "blinds". Writing about such difficult matters, she may have unintentionally mislead at times. Have you identified cases where she told intentional untruths, where she was telling lies in the common sense of the term? Do you consider this to happen only in regard to historic events and to people in her life, or do you also think that she added a lot of make-believe to the philsophy that she taught as well? It would be helpful for you to clarify this point, since I would expect many readers to be seeing red, and becoming quite angry with the statement. An example with mention of its supporting evidence would be helpful for us to consider. I must say that my first reaction to hearing you say that she would mix lies with the truth is to discount whatever you might say and not want to review it. That reaction is based upon the connotations we have with the word "lie", though, where it is considered to be a terrible word, where we do it in life in countless ways but always explain it with different words. Leaving this aside, putting aside the denial that we have to not telling the truth, the refusal to use the word "lie", let's hear more about what you mean, and what you've come across. Could you tell us a bit more? Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 12:16:09 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Metaphysical Humor I am forwarding a message from soc.religion.eastern which makes interesting reading (I hope) for us all! In article qfe@gap.cco.caltech.edu, mw@ipx2.rz.uni-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz) writes: > Raj wrote: > > > My house is on fire, and yours too. > > All houses are on fire, > > What shall we do, brothers? > > So let's not forget: We are living in the same building. > Everyone's suffering is linked with the suffering of all. > Everyone's happiness is linked with the happiness of all. > Everyone's suffering is linked with everyone's happiness. > > > What shall we do? > > What can I do, face to face with impermanence? > Every reaction is already too late. > I do not know where to go. > I do not know. > > Without an escape, suddenly I see: I'm constantly setting fire on > the houses. > > * wonder everyday * nothing in particular * all is special * > > Marc Wachowitz From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 12:16:29 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: HPB telling lies Yes, I'll try. The most obvious case is conflicting stories about HPB's relations with Morya. Her letters to Sinnett say she met him in London and was reunited with him in Tibet, where she studied with him for an extended time. But her letters to Dondukov-Korsakov say that she met a Master in London, on whom "Gulab-Singh" of Caves & Jungles is based, and never saw or heard from him again until many years later, when she got a letter from him in Odessa. She went to India at his orders and followed instructions received in letters, but NEVER ONCE SAW HIM and returned to Europe and thence to America. She was never reunited with him until taking a trip to Yokahama, Japan, from America. This trip never happened. To Aunt Nadyezhda, HPB wrote that the Master she met in London was a Buddhist who lived in Ceylon. And that she never saw him after the first meeting, but got a letter from him in New York. In Caves & Jungles, the Master met in London is a Hindu prince, living in central India. HPB never saw him again for years, until From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 12:33:28 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: HPB telling lies OK, here goes-- although with some trepidation, since I don't want the Internet to be just a new way to make enemies-- and get instant negative feedback. But--- HPB told at least four mutually contradictory versions of her later acquaintance with a Master she met in her youth in London. 1. In Caves & Jungles he is called Gulab-Singh and is the Hindu ruler of a small state in central India. According to this version, her first contact with the Master after their London meeting was through a letter he sent her in New York over twenty years later. 2. But she wrote to Prince Dondukov-Korsakov that Gulab-Singh was indeed based on this Master, but that her first contact with him after their London meeting was a letter he sent her in Odessa many years later, directing her to go to India. In this version, she never once saw him although he directed her itinerary by mail for more than two years. They were finally reunited in Yokahama, Japan, where he summoned her from New York. 3. A third version is found in letters to Aunt Nadyezhda, identifying the Master HPB had met in London as a Nepalese Buddhist living in Ceylon, with whom she had renewed acquaintance via a letter he wrote her in New York. All three versions conflict with the one found in letters to Sinnett, which have become unchallenged Theosophical orthodoxy despite all the other stories. 4. This orthodox version is that HPB met a man in London with whom she was reunited for years of occult study in Tibet well before the periods in Odessa and New York referred to in the other versions. I don't use the word "lie" in the book because it has malicious implications. But surely three of these four versions are untrue (if not all) and were told with deliberate intent to deceive. Why? Surely promises of secrecy bound HPB from head to foot, as she put it. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:02:43 -0500 From: Donald DeGracia <72662.1335@compuserve.com> Subject: To Lewis Lucas from Don Lewis: Thanks for the responce. It's way more important to see the forest first. Once you get the general idea, you can then look at details to any degree you wish. Whenever I learn anything new, I go for the big picture first, then work my way into the details. Hope your holidays were nice. Take care, Don From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 13:11:11 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Why Hindus *CAN* eat meat?! Here is another article on Vegetarianism that may be of interest In article 58m@pdx1.world.net, srinivas@eng.umd.edu (Nagulapalli Srinivas) writes: > Can anyone survive without eating the many micro-organisms > and hence their full-meat whenever they inhale air for breathing? > How can anyone who is rational and not a hypocrite, ever avoid > admitting such killing of living entities and silently digesting them? > > Yet, Hinduism does *advise* that it *helps* not to eat meat. > It does not *MANDATE* that one should NOT eat meat! Furthermore, > just because one does *not* eat meat, he is NOT a Hindu, and also > equally just because one *eats* meat does not prevent him by being > devout Hindu or make him any lesser Hindu. Why??? > > Because, Hinduism is NOT a weight-reducing, diet-controlling > commercial programme!! It is not even a Nutritional Science either!! > It has nothing to do with people's bellies or their belly pots! > > In Gita (Chpt 17) it clearly explains how our "Thought-process" > is linked to our "consuming process" which includes eating-habits. > Whenever our thoughts are nobler and calmer, the type of food we > demand and enjoy is also of that type. Why do (relatively) many people > who are *strict* NON-vegetarians, don't eat steak or lamb-curry for > breakfast and prefer cereals instead? If you disagree here, look at > statistically large American population - many of whom are meat-eaters > what they eat for morning breakfast!! But, why is it so?? Isn't it > true that during fresh mornings when our thoughts are *relatively* > calmer and tender, the food we eat is also *relatively* less violent > and more tender?? Our thoughts determine the type of food we eat and > sadly it is NOT the other around! Nothing stops me from being a crook > just because I just like and eat vegetarian food!! > > Gita only dictates that whatever we *digest* not just by our > mouth, but also by our *minds* is only an indication and expression of > our own thought-patterns. And it further adds that it is important to > train ones mind to become "Saatvic". But, our pundits notorious for > their mis-interpretations, made an inference from it saying > "Eating vegetarian food makes you Satvic", as if "Satwa Guna" is a > diet-controlled chemical compound!!! It is the recurring scream of > our heritage that "Attitudes decide the goodness of actions, and NOT > the actions themselves", which we refuse to listen!! > > The alcohol drunk by a vulgar drunkard, is also drunk by a child > as a cough-syrup when he is sick. Does it make the child a drunkard, > and even worse an aclohol-addict? Note that, regular dosage of > drinking of cough-syrup still does not make a child drunkard! It is > the attitude that child has for it as a medicine, and the attitude > drunkard has for it as an espcaping-maja-maja, which makes him addict! > > So, in Hinduism there are towering personalities like > Vivekananda who also ate fish, but with an attitude to make the > body-equipment sustain the torments of weather such that he continues > to SERVE better, and not to live and expect and demand another > delicious fish-curry from nearest devotee!! > > That is also the reason why our military-people called > "Kshatriyas" (again, not those who are born into certain community!) > were fully allowed and encouraged to have non-vegetarian diet, which > is necessary for their job and excercises. But we dragged that > concept into ugly situations of caste and its customs, is another > sad story. > > But, we also know that before an important exam or interview, > can anyone like to eat bellyful of heavy lamb-curry with all > spiced-chicked legs?? We are careful then not only in what menu we > order, but also in the quantity of how much we eat, so as to not fall > asleep in interview or exam, or at best become dull then. Now, is it > tough for us to imagine the spiritual seekers who whole-heartedly > with all devotion wants to experience the Higher-Truths, in thier > own meditative minds, have least liking for meat and also recommend > others in that situation to desist from it, not because the > "vegetarian stock-market" is going down, but only because it is > harmful for their efforts itself?? So, when Hinduism says don't eat > meat to them, it is just a loving suggestion for their own help, and > not a commandment to eat away from them what they like!!! > > How can Hinduism, which prods and pushes people to strive to > live their "Dharma" and fulfill their duties to the utmost ability, > ask its children not to eat something, which is necessary for their > tasks and efforts??? > > -Srinivas Nagulapalli From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 14:34:48 -0500 From: "Chestatee Regional Library a.k.a." Subject: Re: Why Hindus *CAN* eat meat?! > > Here is another article on Vegetarianism that may be of interest/A > > ... the article appears hear ... Arvind, I have been a vegetarian for many years. In the beginning I thought it was necessary if I wanted to develop my psychic faculities, and that may be an aid. Over the years the desire for psychic powers has waned (an elderly member, now deceased, once told me a story about her own desires along these lines...another time). However, I continue to practice vegetarianism out of respect for the evolving lives in the animal kingdom. I think there are lots of good reason for adopting a vegetarian life style. This just was the one which appealed to me most. I realize you didn't ask, but as I read your post that concern wasn't raised so I thought I would throw it into the discussion. Lewis -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 15:32:50 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: Vegetarianism For the record, I have been a vegetarian for four years plus. At this time, I am also staying away from eggs and cheese at the urging of my holistic MD doctor... My purpose in forwarding this article was to promote additional tolerance for others who are non-vegetarians. My own daughter had to resort to meat eating, at the suggestion of the same MD who told me to avoid eggs and cheese, as her etheric body had become too week due to lack of proper nutrition. We are both on multivitamins and food supplements at this time.... /Arvind > I have been a vegetarian for many years. In the beginning I >thought it was necessary if I wanted to develop my psychic >faculities...and that may be an aid. Over the years the desire for >psychic powers has waned (an elderly member, now deceased, once told me >a story about her own desires along these lines...another time). > However, I continue to practice vegetarianism out of respect for the > evolving lives in the animal kingdom. I think there are lots of good > reason for adopting a vegetarian life style. This just was the one > which appealed to me most. I realize you didn't ask, but as I read > your post that concern wasn't raised so I thought I would throw it > into the discussion. > >Lewis -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 16:54:59 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Some comments & responses Arvind. According to G de P and some others, karma exists on, and can be generated on, every cosmic plane including the physical. If you accidently drop a glass onto a concrete floor, it will shatter - this is an example of physical karma. This of course is using karma in the sense of the law of cause and effect. Cause and effect exist on all 7 cosmic planes of our planetary chain because they work wherever time exists (i.e., MOTION through spacetime creates cause and effect). While it is true that the mental causes effects on the physical, the reverse is also true (go without eating for awhile and see how this effects your thoughts and your dreams!). There is a branch of therapy called cognitive therapy that suggests all of our problems are mental and that by changing our thinking, we will better our lives. While this theory and its practical application have had some good results, it is obvious that it is not significantly better than other therapies (which would probably no longer exist if the cognitive could be demonstrated as superior). Probably the best (in the sense of the highest "cure" rate) modern therapy today is called cognitive-behavioral which is a combination of mental and physical. Personally, I don't believe that the mental is cause while the physical is effect. In some cases this may be true, but our physical situation can also be a cause of our mental condition. Also, it is very easy (and somewhat naive) to assume that *everything* is karmic. Read my article on chaos and think about the Chaos Factor for awhile. I am not trying to change your mind here, but am simply suggesting to you that there may be more going on than you think. Thanks for the SD reference. The idea is that the Dhyani Chohans exist above our four lower cosmic planes (containing Globes A through G) but can embody themselves at will through the temporary monads that do exist on the four lower planes. Omar. I first discovered Kundalini Yoga through the Tibetan books of W.Y. Evans-Wentz (who, incidentally, was a theosophist) and I practiced the "yoga of psychic heat" years before I came into theosophy. This, and other yogas, can be found in his TIBETAN YOGA (Dover paperback that can still be found in most bookstores). Back in those days, books in the Chakras and Nadis were hard to come by. I bought several books by Woodruff (highly recommended) which present the Hindu view - there are both Buddhist and Hindu schools of Kundalini Yoga. The only problem with most of these books is that you have to wade through a lot of Sanskrit. For some more info, check out our Theos-l library for the articles by Don. Don gives a bird's eye presentation of the teachings. Your question "is it Tantra?" is hard to answer. I would say, probably, but not necessarily. Most of the original material is certainly Tantra (again, there is a Buddhist Tantra and a Hindu Tantra) but today there are westernized teachings of it that have little tantric flavor left. I am guilty of this myself because my ENOCHIAN YOGA book westernizes a lot of Kundalini material. But I am certainly not alone - the Golden Dawn, O.T.O., and many other western magic schools also incorporate the Chakras and Nadis (centers/globes/flowers and pathways/channels) in some form. One of the better books today on the Tibetan version is CLEAR LIGHT OF BLISS by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Tharpa Publications) which I recommend, although it may be hard going because of the terms used. I would also suggest you read THE CHAKRAS by Leadbeater. Probably the "granddaddy" of all is THE SERPENT POWER by John Woodroffe, which is an excellent "how to" from the Hindu version. Kundalini (a goddess, by the way) uses its own vocabulary much like theosophy has its own vocabulary. Today we see a lot of modern English translations of the Sanskrit terms, but I am not real happy with most of it. The pranas have become "winds" and the bindus have become "drops." So we read about raising the drops up the channels by controlling and directing our winds. Something seems lacking to me in this translation, but I have no real problem with it because I already know what the texts are saying. While I am on this subject, let me mention Leadbeater's "vitality globules." These, he suggests (in THE CHAKRAS), come from our sun to vitalize the chakras. I have noticed that for many years I have had different results in my yogic meditations depending upon whether I practice during the day or at night. This suggests to me that Leadbeater may have been onto something with his solar vitality globules (i.e., they could be blocked by the earth itself at night). However, I have not heard anyone else ever mention this or even hint at it (it is not in any eastern texts that I am aware of). Anyone else notice a difference between day and night meditation? For example (and this is probably the biggest difference) death is more frightening and more meaningful at night, while during the sunlight of the day death seems but of small account. Is this why rituals that invoke the Lord of Death must always be conducted at midnight? Regarding the seasons: You have to always keep in mind that the seasonal initiations and solar/lunar myths, etc., are all relative. The 2500-year avataric cycle is also relative. None of these things exist in an absolute or permanent sense. You are right; think of it as the longest and shortest days of the year rather than summer or winter and you will be even closer to the truth of it. Katherine Tingley said it best when she wrote "At any moment in every life the hour of revelation may be at hand. It requires no epoch or special season, nor the beginning or end of any outer cycle." (As quoted from SUNRISE, Dec 93/Jan 94, p 96.) Eldon. I enjoyed your "Seven Principles as Conscious Spectrum." A quick look at a blade of grass and it appears very simple and straightforward. But the closer we look and study it, a blade of grass turns out to be highly complex and even contains mysteries that science can't unravel. Life has layers of complexity, and it is this that frustrates new students as well as writers like myself who try to put it into words. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1993 17:18:14 -0500 From: Arvind Kumar Subject: The Second Coming etc. In this message I hope to at least be able to do two things: (a) Provide the complete text of a translation of the Gaytari Mantrum (only the first line had appeared in a message I sent a few days ago, the rest of the text got lost somehow during 'processing' by the listserver). (b) Provide the reference to the Christ's overshadowing of K and also refs. related to the second coming of the Christ. If time permits, I'll also add more comments to a previous message from Jerry H-E. Gayatari Mantrum O Thou Who Giveth Sustenance to the Universe ... References on ROC and K See p. 171 of Discipleship in the New Age (volume II) p. 171; I am reproducing some text here for those who donot have the book: "As I have earlier pointed out, the return of the Christ will be expressed, in the first place, by an upsurging of the Christ consciousness in the hearts of men everywhere; its first expression will be goodwill. In the second place, disciples everywhere will find themselves increasingly sensitive to His quality, His voice and His teaching; they will be "overshadowed"by Him in many cases, just as before, He overshadowed His disciple Jesus; through this overshadowing of disciples in all lands, He will duplicate Himself repeatedly. The effectiveness and the potency of the overshadowed disciple will be amazing. One of the first experiments He made as He prepared for this form of activity was in connection with Krishnamurti. It was only partially successful. The power used by Him was distorted and misapplied by the devotee type of which the Theosophical Society is largely composed, and the experiment was brought to an end; it served, however, a most useful purpose. As a result of the war, mankind has been disillusioned; devotion is no longer regarded as adequate or necessary to the spiritual life or its effectiveness. The war was won, not through devotion or the attachment of men to some prized ideal; it was won by the simple performance of duty, and the desire to safeguard human rights. Few men were heroes, as the newspapers stupidly proclaim. They were drafted and taught to fight and had to fight. It was a group recognition of duty. When the Christ again seeks to overshadow His disciples, a different reaction will be looked for. It is because of this that AAB has so consistently belittled devotion and advocated spiritual independence. No devotee is independent; he is a prisoner of an idea or a person. When Christ comes, there will be a flowering in great activity of His type of consciousness among men; when disciples are working under the recognition of the Christ, there will then come the time when He can again move among men in a public manner; He can be publicly recognized and thus do His work on the outer levels of living as well as upon the inner. For these three events, which are connected with the inherent divinity in man, the Hierarchy is working and preparing, and it will essentially register another of the results of the successful use of the new Invocation to aid in this task of preparation." Of course the book "Reappearance of the Christ" by AAB gives a lot more detail on the related topics; I have relished every moment of my study of the Tibetan's books. Let me briefly touch upon a few of Jerry H-E's previous comments. > > (b) What is your current spiritual 'practice' (to put it in > > different words, how do you incorporate the 'spiritual' into > > your daily living)? > > My spiritual approach and practice is primarly Jnana and > karma yoga. That is I incorporate the spiritual through study > and service (though I'm weaker than I ought to be on the latter). > I also consider my marriage to be a spiritual practice, and > perhaps the most important one. Further, I believe that the > complete practice of any spiritual path ultimately includes all > of the others. Jerry, thanks a lot for responding to the questions I had raised; I also invite others on this network to address these and related questions. I find the answers very informative and useful in my own spiritual practice. > > (c) What is your current 'station' (or 'occupation') in life, > > and what is your next step (or where are you going at the > > moment)? > > My current "station or occupation" are several: 1. I'm a > husband, father, and home owner. 2. I'm a student in the Masters > program at Cal. State Stanislaus. My major is English > Literature. 3. I operate a mail order book dealership on a part > time bases, specializing in Metaphysics, Mythology and Folklore. > 4. I'm associate editor of an acadenic journal called > THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY, published out of Cal. State Fullerton. 5. > I'm a researcher into Occult movements and an archivest. > As far as where I'm going at the moment: I'm trying to get > through the Masters program in order to continue on for a Ph.D. > I'm also trying to get rid of all of the cursed Bermuda grass in > the backyard in order to plant a garden. What are you studying as part of English lit.? Have you read much of Robert Browning? He is regarded as one of the Masters of Wisdom. Also, when you mail my stuff (the check is really in the mail!) can you perhaps enclose one of the back issues of this J. of Theos. His.? Your remark about the Bermuda grass reminds me of the neccesity to keep 'one foot in Sansara, and one foot in Nirvana' (balance is the key objective even in my own life). > >Also, as I was reading one of Eldon's recent articles where he > >has mentioned > >that the efforts of the Masters are many times not 'successful', > >the thought > >occurred to me that the three books by AAB containing DK's > >instructions > >to his disciples ('Discilpleship in the New Age' Volumes I and > >II, and > >'Glamour, A World Problem) are a result of an experiment which > >He (DK) termed > >a failure! This comment ties into a previous comment that (I > >think) you had > >made indicating that HPB's Masters were fallible, whereas the > >Masters in other systems of esoteric studies are made to look > >like entirely 'failure-proof'. > > Yes, the Mahatma Letters have several allusions to that > effect. In what manner were the above three books failures? I do not quite know myself. I will research and report one of these days, but one reason was that the disciples were not doing the simple things that they were asked to do by DK. DK would ask someone to distribute some literature on goodwill or make a mailing list of 'men of goodwill' in their locality etc. but the disciple would ignore that and wait for some instruction to do something more exotic, as in a 'powerful' (my words) meditation... > What is Lucis Trust's E-Mail address? The e-mail for Lucis Trust : pcoles@peacenet.apc.org In Brotherhood, Arvind From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 11:34:14 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: evolution during the rounds We read about seven or ten Rounds, vast evolutionary periods, during which each of the kingdoms of nature goes through its evolution, and the members of the kingdoms, if successful, complete their evolution and move on to the next kingdom. There are three Elemental Kingdoms, then the Mineral, Plant, Animal, Human, and three Dhyan-Chohanic Kingdoms. New lessons in life are learned in each kingdom, and none can be skipped. A Monad has to evolve through all of the kingdoms, in succession, in order to become a self-conscious divinity, in order to become self-awakened. When we speak of evolution through the kingdoms, we are not referring to the Monad itself, which is above existence, untouched by the outer world. We are speaking of the Ego, the ray of consciousness, the living outpost of awareness that the Monad projects into the manifest world. The Ego is mortal, it has a birth, it grows and evolved, and faces an eventual death at the end of our manvantara. But the Ego is also in its inmost core of being the Monad itself, and can attain immortality by its seeking of the spiritual, its making of the higher life an integral part of its consciousness, its raising of itself to eventual reabsorption into the Monad. Being in the Human Kingdom, we have a human Ego through which we, as Human Monads, experience conscious existence. That Ego is a living construct, a web of karmic interwoven into the fabric of life of the world that we exist on. During a Round, the Human Kingdom first has its existence on Globe A, then B, C, D, E, F, and G, and then disappears for a while, until the next Round starts. The Human Kingdom is currently on Globe D, and we are in the fourth of the seven Rounds. With each Round, the superstructure of life is build up more, and new experiences can be had. Even the nature and behavior of matter, and our corresponding senses, unfolds further. Also within a Round, we have an evolution on each of the different planes. On the descending arc of the round, going down the planes from Globe A down through Globe D, we experience the planes in a seeking-materiality manner, as the whole flow of life is downward. Going from Globe D upward through Globe G, we experience the planes in a seeking-spirituality manner, as the flow of life is upward again. In a single Round, we have a period of human evolution on each of the planes. In the first Round, the globes are created, emanated one from the next, and the lifewaves move onto Globe A, then B, and progress along the chain. The time period of evolution on any globe is long, in the first Round, since there was nothing on the globe at first to represent any of the kingdoms. Humanity, for instance, upon first entering our Globe D, has to take the already-existing animal forms and fashion them into the human. In subsequent Rounds, as a lifewave enters a globe, it finds that it has some representatives already there. When the human lifewave entered Globe D, in the fourth Round, for instance, it found some advanced third Round humanity still present, into which it could be born and fashion its fourth Round forms from. The human lifewave did not have to evolve for itself forms from scratch, but could rather take and upgrade the forms of the humans that where already present. The term for these humans, those who stay behind when the human lifewave leaves a globe and moves on during the Round, is *sishtas*. These humans remain behind as a sacrifice, in order to provide the seed for the future humanity when the lifewave returns to that globe in the next Round. Now it would be incorrect to say that we are ready to leave humanity and become Dhyan-Chohans today, even were we Masters or Buddhas. That would be like saying that a child could leave fifth grade, in the middle of the school year, and enter sixth grade, also in the middle of the school year. The student may be advanced compared to what is currently taught in his grade, but there is still more for him to learn in the fifth grade, before he is ready to start the very beginning of the sixth grade! We must complete our full human evolution before we move on. The Masters are fifth Rounders, not graduates of the human kingdom. They still are subject to needing human bodies to exist in. Outwardly, on this globe, they exist in fourth Round bodies. They have raced ahead of humanity and completed their evolution on some of the other globes, so they are ahead of the human lifewave in their learning and experience. But even so, they are ahead of us *in their consciousness*, not in their bodies or forms. They are subject to the same fourth Round conditions that we are, and are only truly in their fifth Round consciousness when the personality is paralyzed and momentarily set aside. They have acquired the qualities that we will acquire in the next Round, but they are still subject to the same forms of consciousness to express these qualities through as we are: fourth Round human bodies. The Masters are not graduates of the human kingdom. They are more truly human than we are, but are not beyond all there is to being human. There are many lessons of the sixth and seventh Rounds that await humanity that the Masters cannot approach, because nature itself is not prepared for such experiences. The vehicles and nature of cousciousness in this Round are not yet sufficiently prepared to express and manifest the fullness of human consciousness. The Masters are as far ahead of humanity as is possible to go without a *mystery*, without something special involved with the Hierarchy of Compassion and the Architects of Life and the cyclic appearance of Avataras. The major turning points of evolution are related to the great initiations of the solstices and equinoxes. We might make the following table of them: winter solstice - 4th initiation - mid fifth Rounder - Mahatman spring equinox - 5th initiation - finished fifth Round - Greater "" summer solstice - 6th initiation - mid sixth Rounder - Bodhisattva fall equinox - 7th initiation - finished sixth Round - Buddha These great initiations are the major steps that we take in our evolution. But with each major step includes or is made up of seven minor steps, so there are really 49. It should be remembered that this is not all there is, and it is not complete, but is the big picture, as far as we have been told, and that there is much more to it that we have not been told. Note that even beyond Buddhahood, there lies the experience of the seventh Round, which cannot be had at all at this time. The world is not ready, it is just not capable of manifesting such a great consciousness. It would be like having the melody of an entire orchestra to play, but only a simple drum to play it on. In the middle of the fourth Round, we learn that the door to the Human Kingdom closed. This was about the time of the descent of the Manasaputras. Certain highly-evolved animals, once simply animals in the Animal Kingdom, are now animals in the Human Kingdom. They are human Animal Monads, overshadowed and used by human beings. When we speak of our animal nature, of our lower side, the mindless part of our human nature, it is just such an animal. The Beast Monad in our constitution is really an Animal Monad, having entered the door into the Human Kingdom, and now used by us in our constitution so that we can devote our consciousness to being truly human, and forgetting the animal side to life. The experience of the animal is that it is overshadowed by a higher self, a greater being that enfills and directs it. This higher self fills it with wisdom beyond measure, knowledge and thought that go far beyond its capability to conceive things. Because of this close association of the animal with a human, it will, over the remaining Rounds, acquire a sense of humanness and of mind by sympathetic vibration, and will have readied itself to be a fledgling human in the next planetary manvantara. Animals that did not make it through the door into the Human Kingdom will continue through the Rounds. More and more will drop out, until but a few make it to the end of the seventh Round. These animals will be the leaders, the most-evolved of the animals in the next chain, in the next planetary manvantara. Now it is not an insignificant thing to keep up with humanity through the seven Rounds. To hold our own and stay in existence through the steep climb before us is a noble, an admirable thing. It would be wrong to look about us, at the humanity of today, and say that this is all there is to being human, and that to move a step beyond our current sorry state of human existence would take us to a higher kingdom! We should rather realize that there is an almost endless--from our personal point of view--series of progressively beautiful, wonderous-- but challenging as well--experiences to come to us as humans. We do not have to go into another, a higher Kingdom in order to progress, to meet further challenges to life. We face a future period of human evolution of which we cannot even conceive! And it stretches out into the distance future for *billions of years*. It is not something that will come in two thousand or even two million years, but rather embraces billions of years of future growth and experience! After the end of the whole evolution, when the seven Rounds are finished and our earth has completed its subsequent rest, another planetary manvantara will begin, another cycle of evolution will start. And even should we find ourselves as humans again, in the Human Kingdom the next time, we will still be doing good. For it would be like repeating fifth grade, and finding that the course materials were much more advanced than before. Our earth, our chain, will be on a higher cosmic subplane before, and all the Kingdoms will be dealing with more difficult materials than before. The next Kingdom after ours, the first Dhyani-Chohanic Kingdom, is entirely different and beyond anything that we as humans can conceive. Our Masters are fifth Rounders, who may yet fail and be human again, in the next planetary manvantara, because they have not progressed to the point of no return, through the door into the Kingdom of the Dhyan Chohans, at the mid-point of the fifth Round. In their inner development, they may have progressed to a readiness for that entry, but until the fifth Round actually happens they only have an inner readiness and the actual experience of going through that door has not been taken. This door into the Kingdom of the Dhyan Chohans involves the mysteries of the great initiations. There are mysteries involving meeting our inner god, first face-to-face, and later becoming enfilled with and permeated with its presence. We become, if we succeed, human Dhyani Chohans, Human Monads in the Dhyani-Chohanic Kingdom. And we are then no longer merely human. Although we are still Human Monads, and still go through the remaining Rounds as such, we are also something more, because of this close association with our inner god, and we benefit greatly by the experience, and gradually take on godlike characteristics ourselves, and become readied for our first day as a Dhyan Chohan in the next manvanatara! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 13:29:17 -0500 From: Katinka Titchenell Subject: Astral XMODEM ASTRAL XMODEM reflections by Kim T. ooooocrcoooomessageobodyooooooooheaderoo o o o o ;-V :-o During the ages of snailmail when a message from Simla to London required a month or more, the transmission of data through astral means was remarkable, useful, and clearly an improvement over state-of-the-art. The shortcomings of this mode of communication could easily be overlooked when its advantages were contrasted with available alternatives. However, in modern terms, astral communication left much to be desired. Baudrate: Astral baudrate was, by all accounts, abysmal. It is possible that the process was restricted by storage and processing limitations at the receiving end rather than transmission but it is still doubtful that transmission rate could have exceeded 100 baud. Error detection/correction: apparently non-existent. Anecdotes reveal some consistent dyslexic data corruption. Channel reliability: intermittent and sporadic. Overhead: There is evidently a heavy premium on the use of astral transmission and related phenomena. It seems clear that accounts were billed according to usage, though whether it was done by time, distance, number of characters (or some combination of these) is not clear. It seems unlikely that there haven't been at least some astral upgrades during the past few years as existing methodologies have become undeniably superannuated. Clearly some improvements are called for. The question I would like to put to the group is: what form might they take? Though the need to print it out, mark it up, fax in around, and then reenter changes will probably endure at least another generation and await new developments in display technology before giving way to the proverbial "paperless office," Ancient theosophists have successfully grappled with and overcome the difficulties of converting to digital data communication after decades of hardcopy editorial tradition. One is now prompted to wonder: "To what degree, after MILLENNIA of communication tradition, have the adepts been able to adapt?" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 14:09:10 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: nature of avataras We hear that in times of decline, Krishna will appear to save the world. The Manus also are involved, as they open and close each great evolutionary period. The Dhyani-Buddhas and Dhyani-Bodhisattvas rule over the greater periods. And there are periodic visits by divinities when the time is right to start a new age. In earlier times, when the Dhyani Chohans appeared openly among men, they acted as the intermediate natures for these divinities. Now they have withdrawn, and their lifewaves are on other globes. Those left behind on Globe D are the Sons of Will and Yoga, and exist in a sort of heaven world, far above Shambhala. When a divinity or Avatara appears now, it is a human Buddha that provides the intermediate nature. An Avatara is the visit of a God, a Logos, a being *higher* than our kingdoms of nature and the Dhyani Chohans themselves. This being has not Ego, no evolved ray of consciousness on our planes, and borrows from beings already here what it needs to form its constitution. Now a Buddha, like any of us, is a composite being. We are a family of Monads. Even though we ourselves are Human Monads, we contain other Monads in our constitution as well, in making up the total being that we are, when fully manifest. Our inner god is the Divine Monad, our spirit the Spiritual Monad, and we are the Human Monad. An Avatara is a temporary association of Monads, an artificial being on our world that wil cease to exist upon its physical death and the release of its seven principles. This being makes no karma, and no new self is created, no new karmic web of relationships with live in our world. An Avatara makes no karma because there is no being involved. Its actions are done in such a selfless manner, so purely, that no individual karmic bonds are formed. The Monads that come together to provide the basis for the Avatara are only in temporary association. They will separate as soon as the Avatara has departed, and do not come back together in the future. The Buddha and Mahatma that help form it are swept along, inspired to act in a certain way, carried on by a sense of divine law, but have no personal volition, no self-conscious decisions, no making of new karma for themselves as well. They do have a lasting impact from the experience, there is a reward. For through their natures have flowed the consciousness and life energies of the divinity, and have been changed by the association. The Avatara itself, the informing life, is not a Monad, not a God or Architect in our world, but higher still, a Logos. It has no existence in our scheme of things, and only visits us as an act of compassion. As a temporary being, it is drawn together from three sources. The human personality is lent by a Mahatman, a very high Mahatman, providing his Kama-Manas and Vital-Astral-Physical form. The spiritual nature is lent by the racial Buddha, providing his Buddhi-Manas. And the Atman is lent by our world itself. Althought Atman is universal and the same in all, and the Atman that would be seen in an Avatara would be identical to that seen in a man, a beast, a plant, there is yet something more to what is in an Avatara. Its Atman is inspired by yet a higher Atman, one that embraces a grander scheme of things than is knowable in our world. It is almost as though, to make an analogy, our Atman, in the Avatara, is inspired by *its own higher self*! Jesus was an Avatara, and many of the great religious leaders of the world. Other religious and philosophical leaders were direct incarnations of the Buddha, on his own volition, in his own work in caring for humanity. Avataras tend to come at critical times in our human history. One such period is the 2160-year subrace cycle. But since subraces overlap, and are not always synchronized in their timing, it is possible for Avataras to appear in different part of the world at almost any time. It is possible, though that does not mean, of course, that it will therefore happen that way. When a new Avatara comes, the racial Buddha has returned, again a channel for the Logos, or rather for *a* Logos. The Buddha is not in charge of the temporary life that is created, but is a subordinate Monad in its constitution. Any high Mahatman may lend his personal self to help form the Avatara. The Master Jesus did it once, but it would not likely be him again. Different high Masters take their turns, there is not one that participates in all the Avataras. The only one that participates in all the Avataras, during a paritcular subrace, is the Buddha himself. With the next Avatara, we would in a poetical sense have the reappearance of Krishna, but not of the same *individual*. We have a different composite being, and even the visiting Logos is different. The special combination of beings that made a temporary Jesus the Avatara will never exist again. Avataras reinspire a people, reawaken them to the spiritual, turn them back towards the light again. They *do not* bring a special quality to humanity, one new quality per Avatara. Jesus the Avatara, for instance, is neither the first nor last to have taught love, and has no exclusive, no special claim to awakening our unveiling the quality of love for the first time. And an Avatara is not an experiment. It does not depend upon the capabilities of the one who lends it his personality, nor the responsiveness of his followers. The Avatara does not *overshadow* someone, and does not take candidates on trial or on a period of probation. It does not test out individuals before using them to house itself. There is nothing to it, it does not exist as a being, until the Monads come together and allow it to manifest. There is nothing to it that could stand apart from things and pick and choose who and what will come together to form it. It is simply not present in our world at all until the temporary being is formed. A super divinity enters our world unheralded, and the Buddha both sacrifices himself and is honored to house it. For the moment, his, the Buddha's, Atman is enfilled with a supre-Atman, one that except for him could not touch or affect our world in any possible way. The connection with the Buddha is immediate, and soon followed by a taking on of a personality. This is given up by a very high Master, one but short of having to give up his body and live himself in the Nirmanakaya, one only slightly-removed in his evolution from having a human body at all. The personality is not provided by a chela or student, like by Krishnamurti. The Avatara clothes itself in the best of what is available, and it is a natural attraction. There is, of course, also a choice and a sacrifice made by the Buddha and the Master, in their participation, but they could not otherwise choose that to accept the role of housing the Avatara! We are blessed at times with visits of being from another, entirely different scheme of things. They come at their own bidding, but also seem to appear at critical points in human evolution. These beings, the Avataras, are never *evoked*, and no amount of prayers or calling from them will ever penetrate to their spheres. They are beyond any god or gods that we know of, and we can only respectfully personify them, collectively, as visitations of the ruler of life, Krishna, and be thankful. Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 18:22:49 -0500 From: "Chestatee Regional Library a.k.a." Subject: Re: Astral XMODEM Kim, Thank you for the most enjoyable post I have seen manifest in this mayarupic arena! It occurs to me that even using this communication channel requires high degree of concentration on the part of this sender anyway. Are you accepting chelas on the art of ASTRAL XMODEM sending and receiving? I, for one, am looking for a more efficent way to respond to these messages. Lewis From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 18:49:30 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: hierarchy and world government It is easy in a study of Theosophy to learn by taking analogies to what we find about us in everyday life. These analogies sometimes unlock great mysteries, and lead us to profound insights. Other times, they can mislead us, and lead us into confusion. One false analogy is regarding government. Our daily affairs are subject to politics, to the government of the land that we live in. We might assume that the inner side of life too is organized into such a form. But there is no inner government of the world, no government based upon initiates, Masters, and still greater beings. After Blavatsky's time, some later writers may have taken hold of the idea of a hidden world government based upon the Masters, but they were in error, and did not understand Theosophy well enough to see the problems with this idea. The Masters do not tell people what to do, they do not give us commands and set laws for our behavior. And they certainly do not involve themselves in our day-to-day politics. They avoid an active participation in our worldly affairs, like finance, commerce, and economics. They have much better things to do with their time, and are simply not interested in our everyday world. There may have been a day, in the distant past, when Masters walked openly among men, and there were Priest-Kings whom ruled over the masses. But those were times before humanity has developed sufficient fire of mind to have individual responsibililty for its actions, and was not karmically self-sufficient. The work of the hierarchy is varied. There is the aspect of the Guardian Wall, of protecting humanity against harmful outside influences. There is the Tower of Infinite Thought, the aspect of preserving the wisdom imparted to mankind by the Dhyani-Chohans, a wisdom that can only be carried on as a living, learned tradition, passed on only from one who knows to another who would know. And there is the work of aiding humanity, in providing assistance to those ready to grow and help in the work, in identifying those in whom can be seen the buddhic splendor, those ready to start the long path that leads to joining their ranks. The Hierarchy of Compassion has the work of parenting, of nurtering, of expression compassion for suffering humanity. It is not a business organization of bosses giving orders, edicts, commands. And at each stage of progression, at each step along the way, there is not a single being, no one individual is appointed to a specific task and holds a special organizational role in the overall hierarchy. At each level, there are perhaps a few, perhaps many individuals, all of equal stature, all participating in the work. As one moves up the Hierarchy, it is not like being in a business organization. Your *promotion* is not partly based upon someone at the next level vacating a position that you can fill. You are not held back waiting for an opening to occur. Your progress is solely determined by the unfoldment of your inner nature, and not upon open positions in any organizational structure. At each level, we see classes or groups of initiates, Masters, Buddhas, then finally of Dhyani-Chohans as well. There is never a so-called job for a single person to fill. We all may take on different tasks, but those tasks are self-choosen and not based upon any spiritual politics. It would be wrong to pick out something, like the so-called seven rays, and say that there was an individual in charge of each of the rays, like we had appointed posts. Even the work of the Logos itself, is of one-or-more individual beings and not single entities. The confusion appears as we near the top of our world, of our universe. Our world or system was created, fashioned, brought together by the informing life of a great being. But that being is not part of any Hierarchy and is not working in any way with us as classes of beings. That is where the misunderstanding can be found. The misunderstanding comes from taking the typical monotheistic idea of an individual, omnipotent, omnipresent creative God and applying that idea to the informing life of that being whose existence brings our world into being. We *are* created due to that being's existence, but not personally so; there is no personal connection between him and us. That informing being exists at a different *scale of being*, and is entirely unaware of us as individuals. It is much the same as we are unaware of our life-atoms, which make up our skandhas, which come together to form our principles as we manifest ourselves. We are only aware of our skandhas in a collective way, and likewise that great being is only aware of us, the members of the kingdoms of nature, in a collective way. In a sense, that greater being is our creator, our God, but it is not omnipresent, not omnipotent, it is not in individual karmic relation to any of us. It is making that false assumption, where we get misled in our thinking, where we try to force the Hierarchy, as it gets higher and higher, and approaches the top-most level, to end up with a single being, and to make that being our planetary or solar Logos. The top of our Hierarchy is not a single individual. It is not any Logos. It is a smaller number, perhaps, of individuals than at lower levels, but there never is any level or point in the Hierarchy at which only one individual can rise to at a single time. We do not have to wait and take turns to exist at the highest levels; we rise as quickly as our own merit permits; there is no bottleneck to spiritual progress. Our only limits are self-imposed. When we reach the top and push on, going higher, we pass out of this world, into higher schemes of existence. We have not become planetary Logoi, planets of our own. We rather are beings at the same scale of being, but not existing in a higher chain, one on a much higher cosmic plane. We have passed on to higher worlds, but have not become ourselves a world in the process. We may, at some distant age in the future, have progressed to the point where we have become planets in our own right, where we are the planetary logoi. But by that time, everything else in the kingdoms of nature will have done so as well. We still haven't shifted our scale of being, but the whole of existence has simply gotten bigger over time! Forget the idea of a ruling class of beings, with Masters replacing priests as our spiritual rulers. Forget the idea of appointed individuals telling us what to do. Forget the suggestion that there may be bottlenecks in our upward paths, where our progress is only by taking turns to fill some arbitrary position in some rigid hierarchy! The Hierarchy is one of nurturing, one of passing on of light and inspiration and encouragement to others, so that they, *by their own initiative* will take steps to raise themselves. They are parents in a sense, and sometimes coaches, but never bosses or commanding officers. We are left up to our own device and council, right up to the last and final initiation. It could not be otherwise. Were someone else to tell us what to do, it would steal our merit, and prevent us from becoming self-reliant. We need to learn to be active powers for good in the world, originating that good *from within*, by our own choice and under our own direction. Without this self-direction, we would not end up much better than the elementals, being perfect agents for the will of others. Look to the light. Strive to live the good and noble life. Ask no one what to do, what to think, how to live, except as that inner voice, that inner teacher, that true nature of yourself itself suggests. Accept no artificial barriers, no rigid scheme of thought, no compromise to popular thought. Seek out Reality. Dwell on the Esoteric Philosophy. Contemplate, and behold the Truth! Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 19:06:38 -0500 From: "Chestatee Regional Library a.k.a." Subject: Re: hierarchy and world government Eldon, I am a new user and am wondering how you manage to post such long messages. Surely you are not doing this online. Do you write these things and save them to file which you can then send to the list? If so, I would like to know how it is done. Lewis From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 19:51:15 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: how I post longer messages Lewis: Regarding writing longer messages for posting, I first write out some notes on two or three 5 by 7 inch pages. Then I write it from the notes, marking with a highlighter the lines as I work them into my writing. I write more that is in the notes, but they allow me to maintain direction and some sense of momentum as I write. If I'm writing at work, before work starts or during lunchtime, I will use the 'vi' editor on a Unix workstation, then post the message without, unfortunately, the benefit of a spelling or grammer check. I content myself to have produced a first draft of material that may, someday, be reworked into something that is publishable. Editing at home, I will use WordPerfect on my laptop, and the text is more polished. When I've produced an ascii file, by either means, then I'm ready to upload the message. From work, if I've brought in a floppy with the file on it, I use VPIX to copy the DOS file to Unix, then 'elm' to post the message. (Before posting it, though, I have to edit out the trailing ^M from every line.) At work, if I produced the file with 'vi', I can simply post it with 'elm'. I can also post files from home. In that case, I'd connect with netcom.com, where I have an account, with procomm plus, then on the Unix side (netcom.com gives you an account with a shell on a Sun workstation) I type in 'rz' (meaning receive a file with the zmodem protocol). On my side, I do and select zmodem and give the name of the file on the computer at home that I want to upload. When the file is uploaded to netcom.com, I edit out the trailing ^M with 'vi', then post it with 'elm'. Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 19:59:04 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Some Comments Paul. Please use abbreviations for last names when more than one first name exists. For example, call me Jerry S. This would eliminate confusion, at least on my part. Your recent message refers to "Jerry" who was apparently against your book. It took me awhile to discern that, perhaps, this was another Jerry. I have already gone on record as liking your book (I still think that some pictures would help, though). You mentioned Alexandra David-Neel in your list of TS chelas. I was not aware that she was even a theosophist, let alone a chela. I considered her to be the best and most reliable author of Tibetan Buddhism that I ever read until the recent influx of Tibetan teachers, who are writing many excellent books (most are available from Snow Lion). My admiration for her is almost equal to that for HPB. I hope you include her in your new book. Brenda. If I ever said that "each of the globes in the planetary chain is one of the seven principles" then I apologize. I don't think I ever said that, and I am not surprised to hear that Eldon doesn't agree. I don't either. So far as I know, the seven *principles* refer to human beings and to consciousness (subjectivity) and not at all to the globes (objectivity). However, there is a basic occult law acting through all of this: As above so below. Eldon. In the vein of friendly constructive criticism, I found your recent to be very confusing. I have asked before if you would quote your sources and you have chosen not to, so I have to assume that your articles reflect your own personal research and study results. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 20:00:41 -0500 From: Gerald Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: GV Model THE IMPORTANCE OF A GOOD UNIVERSE MODEL The real value of models such as the Gupta Vidya (GV) Model, is that it allows us to form and use a mental structure to support our experiences. The mind needs such structures, else experiences that do not fit into socially accepted patterns could be deemed madness. The story of Gopi Krishna is a good example (KUNDALINI, Shambala). He practiced yogic meditation for many years, when all of a sudden one day a light emerged within him, accompanied by a wide range of physical symptoms including fevers and headaches. Without the doctrine of Kundalini Yoga (which is nothing more or less than a mental structure) he would have believed himself insane, and probably have been committed to an institution. In fact, several modern writers have suggested that a large percentage of patients in mental institutions throughout history have simply been victims of a lack of adequate mental framework to describe and/or communicate their experiences to others, who misdiagnose them as crazy. The globes and planes of the GV Model allow the mind to assimilate out-of-body experiences. And we all have such experiences, whether we admit it or not. The globes and planes do not exist "out there" in space somewhere. They are closer to us than the air we breath. And we have experiences on them all the time, though few recognize it. Every night, the vast majority of us lay down in bed and fall asleep, waking again in the morning. Yet the process of sleep and of dreams (which are out-of-body experiences so common to everyone as to not be considered as such) needs explanation. Modern psychiatry has discovered that if we ignore our dreams as unimportant, we can develop severe mental *complexes* and problems. Jungian psychotherapy goes so far as to insist that dreams should be remembered and their meanings worked out, to assure good mental health. Dreams, it says, are messages or communications to us from our unconscious, and need to be assimilated. Modern science has formed a medical model in which dreams are the results of brain chemistry. Throughout history, dreams have been explained in all sorts of ways including messages from the gods. Using the GV Model, we can say that when we fall asleep, our consciousness shifts from Globe D on the physical plane to Globe E on the astral plane. As consciousness moves from Globe E along the pathway connecting Globes E and C, we have various out-of- body experiences that we call dreams. These are usually accompanied by strong emotions because we are on the astral plane. Finally, our consciousness arrives at Globe C. From Globe C consciousness returns to our physical body on Globe D via the process that we call waking. Thus we have undergone a cyclic journey through three pathways that can be notated as D-E-C-D. In the same way, we travel through the cyclic path D-E-F-B- C-D during the night as well. Globes B and F and their connecting path are where we have dreams without emotion. Deep dreamless sleep occurs when consciousness shifts higher; to Globes A or G or their connecting pathway. Thus we can relate waking, dreaming, and dreamless sleep to Globes A through G of the GV Model. In this way, the GV Model (which is only one of several important universe models) serves as a roadmap or guide so that we can assimilate our experiences and relate them to our worldview; failure or inability to assimilate such experiences via a mental model inevitably leads to mental unbalance in some form. There are several universe models available. Probably the best known is the Qabalistic Tree of Life. The Tree of Life has ten globes (the Sephiroth) and 22 interconnecting pathways (which relate to the 22 cards of the major arcana of the Tarot). The GV Model, as annexed by G de P, has 12 globes, and as annexed even further by me, has 17 interconnecting pathways. The 17 pathways are arranged such that all travel or motion through the model is cyclic, in accordance with HPB's Law of Cycles. So, you can only go *up* along the Arc of Ascent, and you can only go *down* along the Arc of Descent. Another important difference can be found between the Tree and the GV Models. The paths of the Tree can be traveled in either direction and each contains sub-worlds or mini-worlds within them that can be explored. All vertical paths of the GV Model, however, are unidirectional and unexplorable. This is due to HPB's clear description of such vertical pathways as laya centers and not really "paths" at all. There are no mini-worlds in a laya center. However, paths connecting dual globes along the inner five cosmic planes are unidirectional (you can travel in any direction within a plane), contain mini-worlds, and are explorable. Thus the GV Model has 5 explorable pathways containing mini-worlds, in addition to two globes, along the cosmic planes. Why are there so many differences between models? Perhaps because we each have slightly different experiences. The question is a lot like asking why there are so many religions in the world. Nevertheless, each model provides us with an important structure upon which we can pin our experiences and retain our sanity. According to the Enochian Model, each lower plane contains a Watchtower and each Watchtower contains 156 separate explorable regions each filled with denizens and rulers. The Enochian Model, like the GV model, has no vertical pathways. I have discovered that all universe models have some things in common with others, while retaining important differences. Probably the best, and most pragmatic, approach to take is to study each model and then adopt the model that comes closest to explaining your own experiences. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1993 22:03:56 -0500 From: OSMAR DE CARVALHO Subject: Kundalini Yoga To Jerry S. from Osmar > Omar. Hey, man! You forgot my "S"erpent!? *8-) > I first discovered Kundalini Yoga through the Tibetan > books of W.Y. Evans-Wentz (who, incidentally, was a theosophist) Thanks for your answers. Sometimes I have to give some advice in cases of people searching for a "real" Kundalini yoga because right here there are a bunch of groups talking and *doing* things about the matter but without any historical or theoretical basis. Osmar / GLASHwave/QWK v2.12 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 10:04:51 -0500 From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM Subject: contrasting the Gupta Vidya Model Jerry S: Both of our models start off with Purucker's twelve globes, and are expanded upon, by us, in different directions. We end up with different systems, although we had an initial starting place in common, and would both give serious consideration to materials from the source writings as we read and study them. Below is an attempt to contrast some of the places where we differ. Since I am comparing my understanding of your system to my system, there's always a chance that what I say of your views may need some correction, but my brief comparison follows. For the purpose of this discussion, I'll call mine the "Esoteric Philosophy Model" just to give it a name. GV = Gupta Vidya Model EP = Esoteric Philosophy Model We don't really need to dwell a lot on the differences. They are aparent to readers of what we write. I don't think that we need to revisit these various points, which we've gone over before. But it may be helpful for someone reading our materials to see a list of some of the differences pointed out, so that they know that we're talking about different models, and not become confused trying to learn both and assuming that they are consistent. ---- GV - The seven principels are the bodies that we have, one on each of the seven globes, each on a different plane. EP - We have a separate self with its own seven principles, including a body, on each globe. ---- GV - There are pathways between selected globes, which are miniworlds that can be explored. EP - There is a single laya center between each globe in succession, between A & B, B & C, etc., and apart from a globe we only exist in the astral light, with consciousness fading out as we move away from the globe. ---- GV - Dreams and out-of-the-body experiences are on the other globes, or in the pathways between the globes. EP - Dreams and experiences that our personality can remember were experiences in the astral around Globe D, and we cannot, with rare exception, remember visits to other globes. ---- GV - We have pre-existing bodies on the other globes. EP - There are no bodies on the other globes, unless we are perhaps chelas, and have been born on another globe and fashioned a personal self on that globe, going through a process of childhood and growth leading to being an adult human on that globe. ---- GV - We visit the other globes through shifting our consciousness to the bodies that we have on those globes. EP - We can visit the other globes in meditation, clothing ourselves solely in Atman-Buddhi-Manas, in pure selfhood, with an experience of our essential nature on that globe. This is in addition to, or different that, our having embodiment and developing a personality on that globe. ---- GV - The experiences of the other globes, existing on them and interacting with their inhabitants, are an integral part of our lives. EP - Existence on the other globes is only in corresponding personalities, other human Egos we have for those globes, and are not known through our Globe D personality. ---- GV - Some globes interconnect via laya centers, and others via pathways which are themselves miniworlds. EP - The globes interconnect solely via successive laya centers, and all have an second laya center leading to a greater world that spans all the planes that the globe chain is on. ---- GV - Your various selves are the embodied beings, one per globe, that make up your principles. EP - You are a human Ego, the one for Globe D, and have a different human Ego for each globe; you are part of a family of associated Monads that make up the entire *you* when in existence on a globe. ---- GV - Your inner development is enhanced by bringing into awareness your conscious selves on these other planes or globes, and magic is a useful tool to bring this about. EP - Our experiences of other planes is just of the senses; we are human Egos and need to awaken the intellectual and spiritual, to de-emphasize the sensory, and to avoid magical practices. ---- Eldon Tucker (eldon@netcom.com) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 10:59:03 -0500 From: "Chestatee Regional Library a.k.a." Subject: Stil-Light Retreat Center Stil-Light Theosophical Retreat Center is in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains less than a mile from an entrance to the Blue Ridge Parkway, which is a scenic drive along the ridges of some of the oldest and highest mountains east of the Mississippi. There are lots of arts & crafts stores in several small towns within 30 minutes of the retreat center. The physical facility consists of a house which was built and then donated to the Theosophical Society in America by Florice Tanner, a retired teacher. It has a efficiency apartment on one end available for speakers and private retreaters. There are two dormotories, two showers, and a laundry room in the basement. There is a large living/dinning room for meetings with a large natural stone fireplace. A library/meditation room and kitchen are also on the first floor. Perhaps one of Stil-Lights most attractive features is the full deck which overlooks the valley below. There is a small mountain stream running down the edge of the property with a small stone bench beside it. It is surrounded by woods, part of which is a nature conservation research area for a local community college. Waynesville, the closest town, offers several other accommodation options from an Econo-Lodge to nice bed & breakfast inns and cabins. Those who like to camp can do so on the property for a nominal fee of $5 per day and have access to the showers and toliets in the basement. For more information please call Lewis Lucas @ (404)287-1753. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 14:03:41 -0500 From: Donald DeGracia <72662.1335@compuserve.com> Subject: To Jerry -Models, ect, from Don Jerry: Nice exposition on the relevance of occult models for explaining dreams and OOBEs. I'd like to add my 2 cents worth on the matter, since its come up . First, I think you are absolutely correct in the assertion that models give us a basis to structure our expereince. You then make the following statement: Now, you touch upon an important point here, and tangent on very important issues related to applying *any* occult model to dream and OOBE expereince. The key phrase is "fit into socially accepted patterns". In terms of our society as a whole, occultism is NOT a socially acceptable pattern, in general that is. Obviously, folks such as you and I see it differently. But generally speaking, the educated elite of our culture does not accept, nor do they have any comprehension of occult models at all. Thus, in your terms, we are "insane" for not fitting socially accepted patterns of belief . The point I'm getting at is the ubiquitous impulse of my current thinking, and that is mixing science and occultism. The fact of dreams is perhaps the strongest inroad to mixing the two. Dreams cannot be denied (though various philosophers have argued that dreams are not real), and neither can they be adequetly explained in terms of accepted scientific concepts. You mentioned Jungian notions of dreams, and even these have the subtle implication that dreams are only relevant in the context of mental health, or in other words, in terms of human subjectivity, a thing that, by its very definition, is NOT objective. One of the profound consequences of occult models is that they posit a means whereby phenomena that are conventionally construed as subjective (i.e. dreams, mind, emotion, etc) are actually objective. That is, the realm of dreams (the astral plane, or whatever term you wish to substitute) is an actual *objective* realm of matter, energy, time and space. Likewise with the realm of thought (i.e. the mental plane) and the realm of spirit (the buddhic plane, or again, whatever equivilenty term you prefer). Granted, terms such as "matter", "time", "space" take on different meanings within the context of the planes, but the common factor in all occult models is that these realms are literal, objective and real, in the fullest sense of these words. Again, this is in contrast to current psychological thought that sees these realms as subjective, metaphorical and unrelated to physics in any fashion. The chakras are symbolic to Jung, they are very real to Gopi Krishna. What I'm getting at is that we cannot be nieve as to the implications of mixing science and occult models. The implications of doing so are astounding in terms of the underlying metaphysics of current science. Modern science is based on a number of assumptions that are completely shattered by occult models. Some such assumptions are; 1. that there is a dichotomy between mind and matter, 2. that only the physical universe we percieve with our sense is *real* or "objective", and the word of thought, imagination and mind are subjective. Actually, these are different statements of the same assumption. The point is, that science as it exists today is founded on such intellectual premises, and the claims of occultism are in direct contradiction to these. This now leads back to your idea of applying occult models to our expereince, for the reality of the matter is that, from a sociological standpoint, the occult models are *competing* models with those of modern science. Again, this is the situation on a sociological level. However, on a purely intelletual level, you and I know, Jerry, that science and occultism have a lot in common, so much so that one bleeds right into the other. Now, the burden that falls upon us, then, is to articulate as clearly and as accurately as possible just how it is that occult models are actually *extensions* of certain scientific models, and that there actually does exist a great harmony between scientific and occult models. Like it or not, Jerry, the sober truth of the matter is that the attempt to mix science and occultism is an issue of persuasion and propaganda. "Truth" has little to do with what people actually believe. However, what people believe has everything to do with how "truth" is construed. Fortunately, I think you summed the matter up perfectly in your closing sentance: This is an imminently reasonable attitude and I agree wholeheartedly with it and, as a matter of fact, this is how I conduct my own personal buisness. However, we have to make a distinction between personal and social. On a personal level, your idea is exactly correct, and it is, I suppose, a function of ones karma whether they ever learn to conceptualize their expereince accurately or not. On the other hand, our society is actually a vast field of thought-forms on the mental plane. These thought-forms determine the collective behavior of our society and fill the minds of the indivduals in our society. These models you speak of are actually *living* fields (actually, "ecosystems" is a better term) of thought-forms on the mental plane. Our minds live in a symbiosis with these throught-forms collectives. What I think is important to appreciate is that the attempts we make to mix scientific and occult models is actually a battle between competeing sets of thought-forms on the mental plane. We are agents for the thought-forms we support and destroyers of those we don't support. So, I've wandered far afield from the issue of dream models. Oh well . Just thought I'd write and add my two cents worth. Take care, Don From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1993 14:38:31 -0500 From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Some Comments Dear Jerry S.: Sorry about the confusion. Will use initials henceforth. About Alexandra, she became a T.S. member before HPB's death, and as late as 1911 spent a long period at Adyar. As you probably know, she was initiated into Hindu tantra and Sinhalese Theravada well before her Tibetan phase. Interestingly, her greatest Master in Theravada was Anagarika Dharmapala, a Theosophist who had been a chela of HPB and will also figure in the book.