From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 03:01:55 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 29, 1998 Dec 30th 1998 Dear Kym: Your thoughtful questions made me review again the basis from which I philosophize - What do we see around us most of the time ? To me it seems to be a mixture of order and chaos. I see everywhere except in our human relationships pretty much a great deal of order. I would say that things that are basic like physics, chemistry, measurement, mathematics, biochemistry, astronomy, etc... all seem to fun pretty much by laws. Science which has investigated these extensively seems to affirm this as fact. But they also take note of many exceptions to the "norms." And in many cases they try to find out why there are those deviations. When we come to human relations we find on examination confusion. There are some established norms in psychology, sociology, government, "the law of the land," etc... But when we come to individual relations everything becomes colored by at least two confusing factors: 1) what we "think," and 2) what we "feel" about things. Who, or what to trust ? Where are accuracy, continuity, stability, truth, reliability ? Various theologies have posited a "god." Evidence as to his/her powers and office are confusing. His/her existence is challenged by some thinkers. If there is a "god" then is the rule benevolent or tyrannical ? If you ask me as a student of Theosophy, then my view is that the UNIVERSE is a lawful place. One of the many aspects of development and progress is what we call the "human mind." On what basis is it to be studied ? What relation have hopes and aspirations to our future - and, do they direct our choices ? If we can choose, then how, and why ? If we convince ourselves that we are ephemeral - live only briefly and for the span of a handful of years, then the consideration of most efforts leads to futility - as we may never profit from our exertions. The "virtues," altruism, compassion, love, affection, self-sacrifice are considered to be "noble" because they seem to be examples of impersonal action, choice or life - and are quite opposed and unusual to our very usual self-centered attitudes and thought/feelings. How is this to be resolved ? I look at many theologies, many philosophies, many opinions - how to sift out of these that which is valuable ? What should we select as a kind of "raft" so as to float on an ocean of uncertainties ? Are we to trust or mistrust our minds and our thinking ? to what extent should we trust our "feelings" about things ? have we kept a record of our thoughts and feelings, so as to ascertain whether they form a continuity, a logic ? I have found that Theosophy, without being "pushy" tends to ask this type of questions and offers some conclusions for us to consider. Are they valid ? Frankly, a whimsical "God" who may or may not respond to "prayer" or "praise" sounds like something that is dangerous to consider as actually wielding power over persons and nations. To me the concept makes no sense. The operation of Karma is not invariably punitive. It provides pleasant surprises as well since it operates all the time and always in the direction of education and assistance. Sometimes one does not believe that benevolence is superior to selfish force and power acquisition. But this difference ought to be one which we can all agree on, rather than something that is enforced unpleasantly. As I see it, it ought to be clear that the rules of order and community life are laid out clearly - I do not mean "customary morality" but, I mean the rules of co-existence which apply all over the earth, and at all times past as well as present, and on into the future. Theosophy endeavors to present concepts regarding the unity of all life - so that a harmony rather than a complete discord is perceived. I don't know if this says all, but I think it is a beginning. What do you think ? Dal. > -----Original Message----- > Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 > From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 02:26:04 -0800 > X-Message-Number: 2 > > Dec 18TH 1998 > > Dear Kym: > > Excellent thinking and I enjoyed what you wrote. Only one thing > I would say is that the "aphorisms on Karma" describe its > operation as an impersonal Law which works all through the > Universe. > > If, for instance we know that 2 + 2 = 4 everywhere and at all > time (barring some mathematicians who try to find reasons why it > doesn't) then we would not take time out to argue that point and > we would all use the same idea. > > If one does good out of fear of reprisals, that is one way of > looking at a reason for good choices. But as you say, it is far > better to do "good" because one desires to be of assistance to > others. The motive is quite different, and as I understand it, > it is the motive that counts for progress. > > Biggest problem, as we both seem to agree is that we don't always > know what is the best choice to make. > > Such being the case, I think if we impersonalize it, and think of > what some other person might do if faced with our problem and the > choices to be made, we might arrive at some ideal way of handling > the situation. In most cases that takes a lot of courage. As > 'FEAR OF REPRISALS" seems to lurk around the edges. > > Dal > > ======================= > > Theosophy Study List Digest for Thursday, December 17, 1998. > > 1. Re: Does KARMA play favorites? > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:11:14 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: Does KARMA play favorites? Dallas wrote: >Supposing that Karma was one of the agents of "God ?" I guess I am stuck on WHY "God" needs "agents." If "God" is omnipotent, the need for "agents" seems unnecessary. I have often heard people in prayer ask for "God" to 'use' them to further "God's" work - why can't "God" do this for his/her/it's self? I mean, what if every entity simply REFUSED to do "God's" work - what would "God" do then? >Should not >everyone assume that "God" is fair and just to everyone ? Should we assume? Probably, but I don't think everyone does nor that "God" necessarily is - to be honest, I'm not even sure "God" exists. >Forgiveness and Mercy in my way of thinking ought to be >distributed fairly, or "God" plays favorites. On what basis >would "God" do that ? If "God" is omniscient, then "God" can certainly figure out a way to forgive, forget, and change a person without causing harm to another person. >And by the way, do we have one "God" or >many "Gods" each described and visualized in the way any devotee >of any faith thinks God is ? I am sure that every human has a different conception of the nature of "God." So there can both be many "Gods" and still just one "God." Or, if "God" is simply the manifestation of humans, then there are many "Gods" and not only one "God." >If we invoke the aspect of mercy and/or forgiveness, then what >happens to the victims if something has been done to hurt them ? >How does that get adjusted ? Who will do the >adjusting ? Well, again, if "God" is omnipotent and omniscient, then "God" can certainly do the adjusting in the proper way. And, this being so, I fail to see why "God" needs a tool such as karma to do it. >I suppose that the evil-doer ought to be active in >making restitution ? Well, GENUINE and SINCERE restitution usually comes AFTER a person has had a change of heart. It follows that a person who has had a change of heart, brought on by "God," would then naturally set out to heal and help humanity. Forcing someone via suffering or negative karma is not the way, to me, to turn a heart - kindness begets kindness, love begets love. If we want someone to learn non-violence, we don't whack them on the head with a hammer every time they whack someone on the head with a hammer. That teaches nothing and merely instills fear. >Supposing again, that everyone has a sense of right and wrong >which is innate to them, so that they know without doubt what is >a good act or a bad one, why would they "fear" retribution ? I can suppose it, Dallas, but I do not honestly believe that everyone understands what is right or wrong. Have there not been many times in your life where you were not sure what action was right to take? I certainly have - and when I thought I had done the right thing, it turned out to be the wrong thing. DALLAS: You are right and that has been my experience also. But then, why should that make me think that the UNIVERSE is chaotic and purposeless ? ========================================================= I do not believe that one should not suffer "retribution" due to ignorance. Knowing what is right and doing wrong is different, but when one DOES NOT know - why should one suffer retribution, especially lifetimes apart from the action and the retribution? >If there >is going to be fear because of uncertainty, then would the wiser >decision be to avoid doing harm to others ? If one is uncertain, how will they know how to "avoid doing harm to others?" In cases of uncertainty, inaction is often not an option. We have to make a choice - what if we choose wrongly? We are not omniscient. DALLAS: Curiously enough if we give ourselves the time to honestly work out the pros and the cons we will probably find that the best way to act is the way in which we would recommend such to some stranger. Impersonality. Is that possible ? But generally we are so very impatient. >If "God" has granted all his children knowledge and wisdom, then >how does he set about getting them to regulate themselves ( not >regulating one-another ? ). Well, if "God" has granted all his/her/its children knowledge and wisdom, why all the human and animal suffering? This seems to suggest that all people who do wrong are doing it purposely because they really have apriori knowledge of right and wrong and are simply blowing it off. The empirical evidence seems to be against this conclusion. And, again, if we had knowledge and wisdom from the start, why did we separate from "God" in the first place? Did we all say "Gee, let's all go down and suffer?" I'm not being sarcastic here, honest. It just doesn't make sense. If being with "God" was so wonderful, why did we check out? And why should our goal be to return there? DALLAS: again, excellent questions. Supposing that we have at our core a portion of the "God essence" (as "god" is held to be omnipresent) then the answer would be that our independence is "God-given" or "God-derived." You might consider that each man-mind has to KNOW THE LAWS AND THE SITUATION FOR HIM/HERSELF. This independence can make us "head-strong," and drive us to errors. Enter the general fairness of all. How to readjust when we are the disturbing element ? KARMA is that readjusting agent, and alike joined to the "God-Power" of the HOLE and to the "God-essence" in each human. What aspect, then, of ourselves is the one that makes errors ? >I know that I am ultimately responsible for what I do and choose. >So I have to take responsibility and not live in hope that >somehow what evil I might do will be forgiven - that does not >sound too sure to me. Dallas, to be honest, it sounds like you are postulating the general philosophy that you do good and refrain from evil because you think you will not be forgiven - rather, than doing good simply FOR ITS OWN SAKE. DALLAS: If doing anything out of simple fear of consequences worked, then the whole world, being fearful of God's laws and powers would do not wrong. Since wrong is done, why ? I would rather understand than fear. It is said that fear arises from ignorance, so I, for one study and seek to know. I understand that, but it kind of backs up my point that the concept of karma is used similiarly to the concept of heaven and hell. >When we are >helpful then should we not be benefited by "God" in response to >our efforts in that direction ? If so, then how would that be >done ? We are benefited, not by "God," but by the satisfaction and Pleasure experienced in doing good. If there were no "God," Dallas, and No possibility of "benefit" given by God, would you still be helpful and good? If so, why? And I do appreciate your kind response to my e-mail. I felt you were speaking to me person to person, instead of person/book to person. It meant alot. Kym ================================================ Dear Kym: I never anted to seem either impersonal or uninterested. I hope what I write above is useful and helpful to us both. Best wishes, and to you and your family for 1999 Dal ======================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:31:56 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Questions for Rich, Jerry, Dallas et al concerning what the Mahatmas are talking about in their references about "Shammars", "Dugpas" etc. Dec 30th 1998 Dallas offers: In my esteem the Mahatmas in writing as they did desired to distinguish between the SELFISH and the UNSELFISH "Paths" and those who follow those two schools - imbued with the motives and choices relative to those separate states of mind and personal "goals." There were at that time some confusion (and it apparently still persists, mainly because we are only able to perceive the EXTERNAL APPEARANCE of things and people, and are unable to see what their inner nature and motives are) as regards Tibetan sects - so it became necessary for the Mahatmas in writing Sinnett and Hume (and others) to draw those distinctions. They speak mainly about the inner motives. Applications can be made all around the world when we consider the motives that drive religious movements (especially the congregational ones: Judaism, Islam, Christianity). In addition to this are the motives of those who participate (and who does not ?) in "capitalism," "socialism," and various other forms of business and politics, where living conditions are enforced on vast masses of people. Essentially to me, the ethical and moral implications of Theosophical philosophy and doctrine are more important than details. The "way out of this morass" is to first apprehend what are the basic concepts of continuing life" 1) the immortality of man's True Essence - his Spiritual Soul-Mind; 2) that this is not only man's condition but that there is a bond between every least component of Nature, taken as a whole. 3) the progress of all beings is evolutionary, is essentially one of a growth of intelligence and consciousness rather than merely a physical one. 4) Nature is lawful in its entirety and impartial, universal and immutable LAWS prevail and pervade the whole of Nature in all its departments, of which Mankind is one. 5) All evolution starts on the subtle planes of Spiritual nature and concurrent with those are the development of material forms. At this our present stage, the two have merged. Consequently we perceive in our minds and feeling natures the conflict and uncertainty of the two divergent/convergent streams of development. It becomes our duty to resolve these in our own minds - by studying Nature and OURSELVES and our capacities and potentials. Much more could be said, and in fact is said in Theosophical literature - such as emanated from the pen of HPB. It deserves correlation and close study in order to verify its accuracy. Such study has to be done individually. There can be no vicarious advance. No one can trust any conclusions except his own. The conclusions that are offered by many who are good thinkers need to be carefully reviewed, questioned, and checked by each "student" in this vast School of Life and living. All through the writings of HPB one can find that she distinguishes between the "DOCTRINE OF THE EYE," and the "DOCTRINE OF THE HEART." The first is intense selfishness and isolation from the rest of Nature - even though this is quite impossible - it is an impossible attitude when forced to its logical conclusions. The second is found to harmonize with nature's ways of adjusting evolution in the widest possible sweep of view. It is brotherly, compassionate, considerate, merciful, forgiving, and yet demands that we as independent minds prove this each for themselves. Much is left unsaid in this brief answer. But if more detail is needed, ask further. Dallas > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of > Caldwell/Graye > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 1998 7:31 AM > To: theos-talk@theosophy.com; blafoun@azstarnet.com > Subject: Theos-World Questions for Rich, Jerry, Dallas et al > concerning what the Mahatmas are talking about in their > references about "Shammars", "Dugpas" etc. > > SUBJECT: Questions for Rich, Jerry, Dallas et al concerning what > the > Mahatmas are talking about in their references about "Shammars", > "Dugpas" etc. > > It would appear that the first reference to "Shammars" and "Red > Caps" > in the Mahatma Letters is found in Letter No. 49, received by Mr. > Sinnett > in early August 1881. The passage from KH reads in the 2nd > edition: > > "We feel that the time is approaching, and that we are bound to > choose > between the triumph of Truth or the Reign of Error and -- Terror. > We > have to let in a few chosen ones into the great secret, or -- > allow the > infamous Shammars to lead Europe's best minds into the most > insane and > fatal of superstitions -- Spiritualism; and we do feel as if we > were > delivering a whole cargo of dynamite into the hands of those, we > are > anxious to see defending themselves against the Red Capped > Brothers of > the Shadow." > > The next reference in a Mahatma Letter to "Dugpas" and "Gelugpas" > appears in a letter from "M": > > "Only, look out sharp; the Dugpas and the Gelukpas are not > fighting in > Tibet alone; see their vile work in England. . . .I tell you the > Shammars are there already and their pernicious work is > everywhere in > our way. Do not regard this as metaphorical but as a real fact, > which > may be demonstrated to you some day." ML #47, 2nd edition, > March 1882. > > NOW HERE ARE THE VITAL QUESTIONS: > > Even if we concede for the sake of discussion that the Dugpas are > actually the Bonpas, what do the Dugpas and Shammars have to do > with > events in Europe and England? > > What are the Mahatmas actually referring to when referring to the > PERNICIOUS work of the Shammars? To their VILE work? > INFAMOUS Shammars? And what work in Europe and > in England? > > Pretty strong language!? > > -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- > theos-talk@theosophy.com > > Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and > teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting > of > "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 13:44:35 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: If this were before the Supreme Court. . . The SD states: > > "...The Host of Dhyanis, whose turn it was to incarnate as the >Egos of the immortal, but, on this plane, senseless monads--that >some "obeyed" (the law of evolution) immediately when the men of >the 3rd Race became physiologically and physically ready, i.e., >when they had separated into sexes. These were those early >conscious Beings who, now adding conscious knowledge and will to >their inherent Divine purity, created by Kriyasakti the >semi-Divine man, who became the seed on earth for future adepts. >Those, on the other hand, who, jealous of their intellectual >freedom (unfettered as it then was by the bonds of matter), >said:--"We can choose...we have wisdom,"...and incarnated far >later--these had their first Karmic punishment prepared for them. Ok, so, "God" offers a thing called 'free will,' but doesn't really seem to want beings to take up the offer. Now, "God" certainly KNOWS that to some beings, this 'free will' thing, this "CHOICE" thing, is going to be akin to waving a big honking chunk of the smoothest, creamiest, richest, tongue-waggin-est, darkest chocolate fudge ever made smack in the beaming and drooling face of a chocoholic. . .hmmmm, sounds like entrapment to me. And I sincerely wonder which group I would prefer to belong to - 1) the group that "obeyed" or 2) the group that said "Hold on one minute here, we ain't going nowhere until we examine the options. In addition, we've heard that "God" is a great cook, and now "God" has went and made this thing called fudge. . .if "God" made it and is offering it, it probably is pretty darn good. Let's not insult "God" by not at least giving it a sampling." But yet, strangely, the fudge-eaters were awarded with this additional thing called 'karma' - all because the fudge-eaters thought "God" was a really cool cook. If "God" wanted to keep all the fudge for "His/Her/Itself," well, "God" could have done what I do - hide it in the lingerie drawer. Well, humans, go figure. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1998 20:02:03 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: NEW YEAR's GREETINGS for 1999 Dallas and Valerie TenBroeck Send you our good wishes for 1999 May the year prove both prosperous and happy for all of us. All the best, Dal & Val ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 15:22:29 +1300 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Karma bits and pieces Addressing some of Kym's comments on karma on 16 Dec 1998. This is a bit belated because I've been away and have only just caught up with the e-mail. Hi, Kym and all. >>Supposing that Karma was one of the agents of "God ?" > >I guess I am stuck on WHY "God" needs "agents." If "God" is omnipotent, >the need for "agents" seems unnecessary. I have often heard people in >prayer ask for "God" to 'use' them to further "God's" work - why can't >"God" do this for his/her/it's self? I mean, what if every entity simply >REFUSED to do "God's" work - what would "God" do then? Ah, a morass of human constructs - "God", "agents", "omnipotence" and the rest of it! I'm not being personal - it's the litter of history. Let's see if there are some other human takes on it all. :) People often seem to have taken omnipotence to mean that a being called God can wield unlimited power to satisfy an intention, even a whim, in the way a limited human personality would. I don't think that the dimension of reality we could call God is like that. It's so anthropomorphic, it sucks. The same with a lot of the concepts of God we've been bequeathed. However, once that bit of surgery has been done, we can stay with the G word as long as we let it have a much deeper, more open meaning. I think that omnipotence rather means that *all the energy there is* is an expression, and an orderly expression, of the one fountain of being. This Source, beyond immensity, sustains the web of consciousness and energy that is our universe of beings and stuff, in all its myriads of grades of density, rates of vibration, scopes of localised consciousness and so on. One of the things I learnt from Geoffrey Hodson (but not him alone) was that wherever there is a perceivable law or principle in nature, there is an associated consciousness and intelligence embedded in it. Not at a distance, pulling strings from some sky-high platform, but intrinsically associated with it, so that the very principle itself is the body, as it were, of a particular shard of the universal intelligence, functioning at more inward levels of being. The principle that we, as humans, observe *very* partially and like (or don't like!) to call Karma, is an example. Another concrete example would be the "law" of gravity. (I'm not fond of that word "law", by the way. Another human construct. Science has learnt not to toss that word around as nonchalantly as it used to. It is also now known to coexist in an intimate relationship with Chaos, so "law" is a rather qualified term.) Anyway, what this means is that an appropriate intelligence is virtually living in the operation of gravity. Not imposing itself on nature from outside, but as a living heart to that aspect of nature. Extend this throughout nature, and it will give a glimpse of why Nature can affect us with its beauty and be so soul-restoring. Provided humans haven't stuffed it up and overlaid the essential atmosphere with their own gunk. Of course, when you think of being incarnated in the law of gravity for 20 billion years, it sounds like an unbelievably boring existence - "I sentence you to 20 billion years in the law of gravity" :-} - but according to those who have touched the fringes of such a consciousness, it retains its sense of connectedness with the rest of the living universe and participates in the whole network of being with the Joy that humans seem to specialise in forgetting. The beings or consciousnesses I'm talking about are part of or related to what is called the Deva or angelic kingdom, but right away, by calling in those words, we've invoked more clusters of human cultural trappings. Scalpel, please .... :-) >I am sure that every human has a different conception of the nature of >"God." So there can both be many "Gods" and still just one "God." Or, if >"God" is simply the manifestation of humans, then there are many "Gods" and >not only one "God." Aye, you've said it. I think a good approach is to think "Is this concept of God likely or realistic?" and put it aside if not. But note that this kind of open, creative (ie not destructive) doubt does not *at all* mean you need to give up on the idea that there is a supreme something that is not only the source of all, but links everything in an all-embracing web of relationship. It's interesting that the whole of science is founded on the *belief* that what's true in one corner of the universe is true in others. Observation sofar bears that out, with some graded fields of variation that have become apparent in cosmology, but notice how this kind of faith combines quite naturally with open-mindedness. A far cry from the faith plus closed-mindedness that much of western religion forced on its followers down the centuries. What we have to do as humans is be forever willing to let go of a concept we've held, even if lovingly for 7 decades, in favour of a better one when it knocks on our door. Who wants their tiny mind to remain just as tiny till the day they die?? I already know that you don't :-) >Well, again, if "God" is omnipotent and omniscient, then "God" can >certainly do the adjusting in the proper way. And, this being so, I fail >to see why "God" needs a tool such as karma to do it. By now, I hope I've pointed out a way of seeing all this so that the separateness implicit in the idea of a tool, or of needing a tool, has basically dissolved away. But, having said that, the innate expressiveness of the Oneness, can be mediated and assisted by beings which have reached self consciousness and self-determined action. As humans, we have the choice to help along the evolutionary process around us; to help or hinder, build or destroy. To be of service or require service. So there is, in a way, a neediness. Maybe it's better thought of as an opportunity for the real joy of participating in the universal creative process. And that's about the highest definition of fulfilment - and fun - you can get. Love Murray ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 00:50:07 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: If this were before the Supreme Court. . . kymsmith@micron.net writes >If "God" wanted to keep all the fudge for "His/Her/Itself," well, "God" >could have done what I do - hide it in the lingerie drawer. Which I also invented [signed, "God"] > >Well, humans, go figure. Blast! You discovered my Grand Plan! [Also signed "God"] (Channeled through Alan) --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 00:53:04 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: NEW YEAR's GREETINGS for 1999 In a message dated 98-12-30 20:05:19 EST, you write: << Dallas and Valerie TenBroeck Send you our good wishes for 1999 May the year prove both prosperous and happy for all of us. All the best, Dal & Val >> And may we all be wishing the same things at this time next year. Chuck the Heretic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 15:54:07 +1300 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: The Supreme Court, Fudge and Karma Responding to Kym and Dallas. First, Dallas gave us a quote from the SD which I'll requote to include the end, trimmed somewhat: >"...The Host of Dhyanis, whose turn it was to incarnate as the >Egos of the immortal, but, on this plane, senseless monads .... >some "obeyed" (the law of evolution) immediately .... These were >those early conscious Beings who, .... became the seed on earth for >future adepts. Those, on the other hand, who, jealous of their >intellectual freedom (unfettered as it then was by the bonds of >matter), said:--"We can choose...we have wisdom,"...and incarnated >far later--these had their first Karmic punishment prepared for them. >They got bodies (physiologically) inferior to their astral >models, because their chhayas had belonged to progenitors of an >inferior degree in the 7 classes. As to those "Sons of Wisdom" >who had "deferred" their incarnation till the 4th Race, which was >already tainted (physiologically) with sin and impurity, they >produced a terrible cause, the Karmic result of which weighs on >them to this day...the bodies they had to inform had become >defiled through their own procrastination...This was the "Fall of >the angels," ..... SD II 228 > Then Kym wrote: >Ok, so, "God" offers a thing called 'free will,' but doesn't really seem to >want beings to take up the offer. Now, "God" certainly KNOWS that to some >beings, this 'free will' thing, this "CHOICE" thing, is going to be akin to >waving a big honking chunk of the smoothest, creamiest, richest, >tongue-waggin-est, darkest chocolate fudge ever made smack in the beaming >and drooling face of a chocoholic. . .hmmmm, sounds like entrapment to me. A revealing statement .... . Kym, are you sure you have your life under control? Only a little more seriously, I admit that my first reaction to this text was to rebel at the apparent arbitrariness, even nastiness, of getting a karmic kick in the teeth for choosing to delay getting incarnated. But then I tossed it around a bit to see if I could find a reasonable principle or process in those apparently cranky words. Sure enough, a couple of ideas came up, like this: First, the karma is a *natural* reaction or consequence, just as gut-ache is a consequence of eating too much chocolate fudge at once, no matter how enticing. So it's not vindictive, just what happens if you use free will that way. You use just as much free will to make the other choice, in fact probably a lot more :-) So it wasn't a matter of one lot of these beings using free will and the others not. If it's the sense of coercion like "Obey me out of your free will or I'll make your pay for it" you don't like, well, that would rile me too, but I don't think it was really like that. I think the choice to delay incarnation was in a way choosing to deny one's inner purpose. To enjoy the immediate (the chocolate fudge) at the expense of the longer-term. To choose to be a fractured or discordant being. And the consequences of this we can see in ordinary human terms around us, in those who consciously or unconsciously have made this kind of choice. Further, as the quote implies, the evolution of the higher and lower components of being got more out of step as the delay increased. With children, having unruly or "impure" personal vehicles as a result of environment or unwise parenthood only makes the job of the incoming spiritual being harder. Again, not vindictive, just a consequence. So, I think it's something like this. It is hard to know what these cryptic statements are about, but if as we're told, we need to use our intuition to burrow beyond the surface, then we've got a hell of a good opportunity to build up intuitional athleticism right here!! :-) I love your writing, by the way; both you (Kym) and Dallas, in your very different ways. Murray PS: Isn't it intriguing how different streams of consciousness and history, at different levels, are portrayed as making up the human being? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:22:47 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 Alan wrote: >Let us extend our thoughts of horror and sadness at the plight of the >people of Iraq at this awful time; may they soon find peace. I agree; however, the Iraqi people have been under seige for years. I believe that the bombings occuring right now are just adding to their suffering, but even after the bombings stop, their suffering will continue. Saddam Hussein appears to have gained weight; the people, however, still look as thin as ever. >For the honour of the USA and the American people, it is my personal >opinion that President Clinton should stand down voluntarily as soon >after this initial action as possible, so that whatever happens next is >conducted by someone who cannot be suspected of using the Gulf >situation to save their own skin. Have to disagree here. Most of the people in America (according to the latest polls) do not see nor suspect this as being a ploy for Clinton to avoid impeachment hearings. Those who are against him are trying to make the public believe that this just may be the case, but the evidence and the speech given by Tony Blair proves the opposite. It makes little sense that Great Britian would risk the lives of their people simply to aid Clinton in his domestic difficulties - nor will such an action change the minds of anyone who was FOR impeachment. For many people in America, to lose President Clinton due to the continued pummeling by those who want him gone, would be wrenching. And not to mention the great joy and power this will give to those who began the steady barrage of rumors and accusations back in Clinton's first year as President. Those who want him out are banking on the hopeful possibility that the people will just give up, get tired, and approve of Clinton resigning just to shut them all up. And, besides, the person who would replace him, Al Gore, has been subjected to the some of the same rumor and attack Clinton has endured. Mr. Gore has been accused of most everything except an extra-marital affair. I fail to see how Clinton resigning will restore honor to the USA - it might result in just the opposite. How can the USA be seen as honorable when a one of our Presidents - three times nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize and popular with the people - was, ultimately, persecuted out of office? Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 02:26:04 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 Dec 18TH 1998 Dear Kym: Excellent thinking and I enjoyed what you wrote. Only one thing I would say is that the "aphorisms on Karma" describe its operation as an impersonal Law which works all through the Universe. If, for instance we know that 2 + 2 = 4 everywhere and at all time (barring some mathematicians who try to find reasons why it doesn't) then we would not take time out to argue that point and we would all use the same idea. If one does good out of fear of reprisals, that is one way of looking at a reason for good choices. But as you say, it is far better to do "good" because one desires to be of assistance to others. The motive is quite different, and as I understand it, it is the motive that counts for progress. Biggest problem, as we both seem to agree is that we don't always know what is the best choice to make. Such being the case, I think if we impersonalize it, and think of what some other person might do if faced with our problem and the choices to be made, we might arrive at some ideal way of handling the situation. In most cases that takes a lot of courage. As 'FEAR OF REPRISALS" seems to lurk around the edges. Dal ======================= Theosophy Study List Digest for Thursday, December 17, 1998. 1. Re: Does KARMA play favorites? ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:11:14 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: Does KARMA play favorites? Dallas wrote: >Supposing that Karma was one of the agents of "God ?" I guess I am stuck on WHY "God" needs "agents." If "God" is omnipotent, the need for "agents" seems unnecessary. I have often heard people in prayer ask for "God" to 'use' them to further "God's" work - why can't "God" do this for his/her/it's self? I mean, what if every entity simply REFUSED to do "God's" work - what would "God" do then? >Should not >everyone assume that "God" is fair and just to everyone ? Should we assume? Probably, but I don't think everyone does nor that "God" necessarily is - to be honest, I'm not even sure "God" exists. >Forgiveness and Mercy in my way of thinking ought to be >distributed fairly, or "God" plays favorites. On what basis >would "God" do that ? If "God" is omniscient, then "God" can certainly figure out a way to forgive, forget, and change a person without causing harm to another person. >And by the way, do we have one "God" or >many "Gods" each described and visualized in the way any devotee >of any faith thinks God is ? I am sure that every human has a different conception of the nature of "God." So there can both be many "Gods" and still just one "God." Or, if "God" is simply the manifestation of humans, then there are many "Gods" and not only one "God." >If we invoke the aspect of mercy and/or forgiveness, then what >happens to the victims if something has been done to hurt them ? >How does that get adjusted ? Who will do the >adjusting ? Well, again, if "God" is omnipotent and omniscient, then "God" can certainly do the adjusting in the proper way. And, this being so, I fail to see why "God" needs a tool such as karma to do it. >I suppose that the evil-doer ought to be active in >making restitution ? Well, GENUINE and SINCERE restitution usually comes AFTER a person has had a change of heart. It follows that a person who has had a change of heart, brought on by "God," would then naturally set out to heal and help humanity. Forcing someone via suffering or negative karma is not the way, to me, to turn a heart - kindness begets kindness, love begets love. If we want someone to learn non-violence, we don't whack them on the head with a hammer every time they whack someone on the head with a hammer. That teaches nothing and merely instills fear. >Supposing again, that everyone has a sense of right and wrong >which is innate to them, so that they know without doubt what is >a good act or a bad one, why would they "fear" retribution ? I can suppose it, Dallas, but I do not honestly believe that everyone understands what is right or wrong. Have there not been many times in your life where you were not sure what action was right to take? I certainly have - and when I thought I had done the right thing, it turned out to be the wrong thing. I do not believe that one should not suffer "retribution" due to ignorance. Knowing what is right and doing wrong is different, but when one DOES NOT know - why should one suffer retribution, especially lifetimes apart from the action and the retribution? >If there >is going to be fear because of uncertainty, then would the wiser >decision be to avoid doing harm to others ? If one is uncertain, how will they know how to "avoid doing harm to others?" In cases of uncertainty, inaction is often not an option. We have to make a choice - what if we choose wrongly? We are not omniscient. >If "God" has granted all his children knowledge and wisdom, then >how does he set about getting them to regulate themselves ( not >regulating one-another ? ). Well, if "God" has granted all his/her/its children knowledge and wisdom, why all the human and animal suffering? This seems to suggest that all people who do wrong are doing it purposely because they really have apriori knowledge of right and wrong and are simply blowing it off. The empirical evidence seems to be against this conclusion. And, again, if we had knowledge and wisdom from the start, why did we separate from "God" in the first place? Did we all say "Gee, let's all go down and suffer?" I'm not being sarcastic here, honest. It just doesn't make sense. If being with "God" was so wonderful, why did we check out? And why should our goal be to return there? >I know that I am ultimately responsible for what I do and choose. >So I have to take responsibility and not live in hope that >somehow what evil I might do will be forgiven - that does not >sound too sure to me. Dallas, to be honest, it sounds like you are postulating the general philosophy that you do good and refrain from evil because you think you will not be forgiven - rather, than doing good simply FOR ITS OWN SAKE. I understand that, but it kind of backs up my point that the concept of karma is used similiarly to the concept of heaven and hell. >When we are >helpful then should we not be benefited by "God" in response to >our efforts in that direction ? If so, then how would that be >done ? We are benefited, not by "God," but by the satisfaction and pleasure experienced in doing good. If there were no "God," Dallas, and no possibily of "benefit" given by God, would you still be helpful and good? If so, why? And I do appreciate your kind response to my e-mail. I felt you were speaking to me person to person, instead of person/book to person. It meant alot. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:06:41 EST From: ZZZLEEPER@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 Alan, In many people's opinions the president should do many things. Stepping down after the initial Iraq attack may be one of them. However, I think that one needs to see the consistency of a pattern with him which includes a refusal to resign in any manner and a clinging to the office like a life buoy. The fellow loves his power that much. Julien ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 08:05:41 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 At 08:06 AM 12/18/1998 EST, ZZZLEEPER@aol.com wrote: >Alan, > >In many people's opinions the president should do many things. Stepping down >after the initial Iraq attack may be one of them. However, I think that one >needs to see the consistency of a pattern with him which includes a refusal to >resign in any manner and a clinging to the office like a life buoy. The fellow >loves his power that much. > >Julien Dear Julien: After having been elected twice and having high public support for his job performance, I see no reason for him to give up his office. I personally know many people, young and old who do not see any reason for him to leave. After all we did not elect him to be a saint. mkr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:16:26 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: WINTER SOLSTICE == REBIRTH OF THE GUN-GOD Dec 19th 1998 The SUN - in Nature and in Man "Every bright sun-god of antiquity--a glorious deity by day, and its own opponent and adversary by night, named Dragon of Wisdom, because it was supposed to contain the germs of night and day--has now been turned into the antithetical shadow of God, SUN GOD (by day) and Adversary (by night) -- Tribal Gods and has become Satan on the sole and unsupported authority of despotic human dogma. After which all these producers of light and shadow, all the Sun and Moon Gods, were cursed, and thus the one God chosen out of the many, and Satan, were both anthropomorphised...History shows in every race and even tribe, especially in the Semitic nations, the natural impulse to exalt its own tribal deity above all others to the hegemony (508) of the god; and proves that the God of the Israelites was such a tribal God, and no more, even though the Christian Church, following the lead of the "chosen" people, is pleased to enforce the worship of that one particular deity...Jehovah has ever been in antiquity only "a god among other Gods," (lxxxii, Psalm)... SD II 507-8 "This visible universe of spirit and matter...is but the concrete image of the ideal abstraction; it was built on the model of the first divine idea. Thus our universe existed from eternity in a latent state. The soul animating this purely spiritual universe is the central sun, the highest deity itself. It was not himself who built the concrete form of his idea, but his "first-begotten;" and as it was constructed on the geometrical figure of the dodecahedron [Plato, Timaeus ], the first -begotten "was please to employ 12,000 years in its creation." Isis I 342 Man -- The Microcosmic Sun. Man is a "thinking atom" of living eternal substance, a microcosm of the Macrocosmic Sun. "It is the Spiritual evolution of the inner, immortal man that forms the fundamental tenet in the Occult Sciences...the One Universal Life, independent of matter...and...the individual intelligences that animate the various manifestations of this Principle...The One Life is closely related to the one law which governs the World of Being--Karma." SD I 634 "The spirit in man is the only real and permanent part of his being; the rest of his nature being variously compounded...everything in man but his spirit is impermanent... the Universe being one thing and not diverse, and everything within it being connected with the whole and with every other thing therein, of which upon the upper plane...there is perfect knowledge, no act or thought occurs without each portion of the great whole perceiving and noticing it. Hence all are inseparably bound together by the tie of Brotherhood...it is taught that there is no creation of worlds...but that their appearance is due strictly to evolution, When the time comes for the Unmanifested to manifest as an objective Universe, which it does periodically, it emanates a Power or "The First Cause"--so called because it itself is the rootless root of that Cause, and called in the East the "Causeless Cause."...The projection into time of the influence or so-called "breath of Brahma" causes all the worlds and the beings upon them to gradually appear. They remain in manifestation just as long as that influence continues to proceed forth in evolution. After long aeons the outbreathing, evolutionary influence slackens, and the universe begins to go into obscuration, or pralaya, until, the "breath" being fully indrawn, no objects remain, because nothing is but Brahm. Care must be taken by the student to make a distinction between Brahm (the impersonal Parabrahm) and Brahma the manifested Logos. This breathing forth is known as a Manvantara, or the Manifestation of the world between two Manus...For the purpose of a Manvantara two so-called eternal principles are postulated, that is, Purusha and Prakriti (or spirit and matter), because both are ever present and conjoined in manifestation. This brings us to the doctrine of Universal Evolution as expounded by the Sages of the Wisdom-Religion. The Spirit, or Purusha, they say, proceeds from Brahma through the various forms of matter evolved at the same time, beginning in the world of the spiritual from the highest and in the material world from the lowest form...yet unknown to modern science. Thus, therefore, the mineral, vegetable and animal forms each imprison a spark of the Divine, a portion of the indivisible Purusha. These sparks struggle to "return to the Father," or in other words, to secure self-consciousness and at last come into the highest form, on Earth, that of man, where alone self-consciousness is possible to them. The period calculated in human time, during which this evolution goes on embraces millions of ages. Each spark of divinity has, therefore, millions of ages in which to accomplish its mission...all depends upon the individual's own will and efforts. Each particular spirit thus goes through the Manvantara, or enters into manifestation for its own enrichment and for that of the Whole. Mahatmas and Rishis are thus gradually evolved during a Manvantara, and become after its expiration, planetary spirits, who guide the evolution of other future planets. The planetary spirits of our globe are those who in previous manvantaras...made the efforts, and became in the course of that long period Mahatmas. This system is thus seen to be based upon the identity of Spiritual Being, and, under the name of "Universal Brotherhood," constitutes the basic idea of the T S, whose object is the realization of that Brotherhood among men." WQJ - Epitome pp. 9 - 12. The SUN in Man "Nature," the physical evolutionary Power, could never evolve intelligence unaided--she can only create "senseless forms,"...The "Lunar Monads" cannot progress, for they have not yet had sufficient touch with the forms (182) created by "Nature" to allow of their accumulating experiences through its means. It is the Manasa-Dhyanis who fill the gap, and they represent the evolutionary power of Intelligence or Mind, the link between "Spirit" and "Matter"--in this Round." SD I 181-182 Offered by Dallas - as thoughts on the 1998 SOLSTICE ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:36:19 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: WINTER SOLSTICE == REBIRTH OF THE GUN-GOD In a message dated 98-12-18 15:16:37 EST, you write: << "The spirit in man is the only real and permanent part of his being; the rest of his nature being variously compounded...everything in man but his spirit is impermanent... the Universe being one thing and not diverse, and everything within it being connected with the whole and with every other thing therein, of which upon the upper plane...there is perfect knowledge, no act or thought occurs without each portion of the great whole perceiving and noticing it. Hence all are inseparably bound together by the tie of Brotherhood...it is taught that there is no creation of worlds...but that their appearance is due strictly to evolution, >> Often, in fact most of the time, we are so busy with our short physical lives that we forget this basic truth that binds us all in spite of our petty disagreements. Thanks and a merry Soltice to you all. Chuck the Heretic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:36:21 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: More thoughts on SUN and MAN == SOLSTICE 1998 Dec 19th 1998 The SUN in Man "Nature," the physical evolutionary Power, could never evolve intelligence unaided--she can only create "senseless forms,"...The "Lunar Monads" cannot progress, for they have not yet had sufficient touch with the forms (182) created by "Nature" to allow of their accumulating experiences through its means. It is the Manasa-Dhyanis who fill the gap, and they represent the evolutionary power of Intelligence or Mind, the link between "Spirit" and "Matter"--in this Round." SD I 181-182 Perfection in Evolution: the Universal Man-Sun The "Mahatma" is a "great Soul," a man who through evolution and moral purification has mastered all the laws and mysteries of Nature. he knows the Spiritual Central Sun and also is fully aware that a Ray of IT is present in himself, as it is also present in all other beings. In this connection, Mr. Judge wrote: "A visitor from one of the other planets of the solar system who might learn the term Mahatma after arriving here would certainly suppose that the etymology of the word undoubtedly inspired the believers in Mahatmas with the devotion, fearlessness, hope, and energy which such an ideal should arouse in those who have the welfare of the human race at heart...The whole sweep, meaning, and possibility of evolution are contained in the word Mahatma. Maha is "great," Atma is "soul," and both compounded into one mean those great souls who have triumphed before us not because they are made of different stuff and are of some strange family, but just because they are of the human race. Reincarnation, karma, the sevenfold division, retribution, reward, struggle, failure, success, illumination, power, and a vast embracing love for man, all these lie in that single word. The soul emerges from the unknown, begins to work in and with matter, is reborn again and again, makes karma, develops the 6 vehicles for itself, meets retribution for sin and punishment for mistake, grows strong by suffering, succeeds in bursting through the gloom, is enlightened by true illumination, grasps power, retains charity, expands with love for orphaned humanity, and thenceforth helps all others who remain in darkness until all may be raised up to the place with the "Father in Heaven" who is the Higher Self." WQJ Art. II, p. 39-40 The Universal Evolution of Microcosmic Suns Theosophical philosophy draws attention to the "scientific atom" which by definition is called a "perpetual motion machine." It is deemed to have originated in an unimaginable past time in Solar bodies and since then has floated through space, aggregating with others and eventually forming the physical forms of all beings, including mankind on our earth. Occult philosophy says: "...every atom of man's body has been evolving by imperceptible gradations, from lower into higher forms, through the cycles--...a Spirit is a Ray, a fraction of the Whole; and the Whole being Omniscient and Infinite, Its fractions must partake, in degree, of the same abstract attributes. Man's "Spirit" must become the drop of the ocean...instead of remaining the body only. He must feel himself not only a part of the Creator, Preserver and Destroyer, but of the Soul of the Three, the Parabrahmam, who is above these and is the vitalizing, energizing and ever-presiding Spirit. He must fully realize the sense of...the "ever still present," in which there is neither past nor future, but one infinite eternity of present...." Modern Panarion, p. 171 "After circling so to say, along the arc of the cycle...when the Spirit-man reaches our "planet" [ Globe--SD I ], which is one of the lowest, having lost at every station some of the ethereal and acquired an increase of material nature, both spirit and matter have become pretty much equilibrized in him. (47) But then he has the Earth's cycle to perform; and, as in the process of involution and evolution downward, matter is ever striving to stifle spirit, when arrived at to the lowest point of his pilgrimage, the once pure Planetary Spirit [ Trans. 23-4 ] will be found dwindled to--what Science agrees to call a primitive or Primordial man--amidst a nature as primordial--speaking geologically, for physical nature keeps pace with the physiological as well as the spiritual man, in her cyclic career. At that point the great Law begins its work of selection. Matter found entirely divorced from spirit is thrown into the still lower worlds--into the sixth "Gate" or "way of rebirth." of the vegetable and mineral worlds, and of the primitive animal forms. From thence, matter ground over in the workshop of nature proceeds soulless back to its Mother Fount; while the Egos purified of their dross are enabled to resume their progress once more onward... It is but matter (or material man) which is compelled by its own weight to descend to the very bottom of the "circle of necessity" to there assume animal form; as to the winner of that race throughout the worlds--the Spiritual Ego, he will ascend from star to star, from one world to another, circling onward to rebecome the once pure planetary Spirit, then higher still, to finally reach its first starting point, and from thence--to merge into mystery. No adept has ever penetrated beyond the veil of primitive Kosmic matter. The highest, the most perfect vision is limited to the universe of Form and Matter." M L p. 46-7 "Every Spiritual Individuality has a gigantic evolutionary journey to perform, a tremendous gyratory progress to accomplish. First--at the very beginning of the great Mahamanvanataric rotation, from first to last of the man-bearing "planets," as on each of them, the monad has to pass through the seven successive races of man...up to the present fifth race, or rather variety, and through two more races, before he has done with this one. Each of the 7 races send 7 ramifying branchlets from the Parent Branch: and through each of these in turn man has to evolute before he passes on to the next higher race; and that--seven times...The branchlets typify varying specimens of humanity -- physically and spiritually--and no one of us can miss one single rung of the ladder...when I say "man," I mean a human being of our type. There are other and innumerable manvantaric chains of globes bearing intelligent beings--both in and out of our solar system--the crowns or apexes of evolutionary being in their respective chains, some--physically and intellectually--lower, others immeasurably higher than the man of our chain..." Mahat. Let. 119 "What then is the universe for, and for what final purpose is man the immortal thinker here in evolution? It is all for the experience and emancipation of the soul, for the purpose of raising the entire mass of manifested matter up to the stature, nature, and dignity of conscious god-hood, The great aim is to reach to self-consciousness...by and through the perfecting after transformation, of the whole mass of matter as well as what we now call soul. Nothing is or is to be left out. The aim for present man is his initiation into complete knowledge, and for the other kingdoms below him that they be raised up gradually from stage to stage to be in time initiated also. This is evolution carried to its highest power; it is a magnificent prospect; it makes of man a god, and gives to every part of nature the strength and possibility of being one day the same; there is strength and nobility in it, for by this no man is dwarfed and belittled, for no one is so originally sinful that he cannot rise above all sin...Present religions keep the element of fear..." Ocean p. 60-1 Offered for consideration by Dallas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:36:27 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: WHERE ARE WE ALL GOING ? Dec 19th 1998 A Long Journey for the Man-Sun "...the Monad had passed through, journeyed and been imprisoned in, every transitional form throughout every kingdom of nature during the three preceding Rounds. But the monad which becomes human is not the Man. In this Round--with the exception of the highest mammals after man, the anthropoids destined to die out in this our race, when their monads will be liberated and pass into the astral human forms (or the highest elementals) of the Sixth * and the Seventh Races, and then into lowest human forms in the fifth Round--no units of either of the kingdoms are animated any longer by monads destined to become human in their next stage, but only by the lower Elementals of their respective realms. ** * Nature never repeats herself, therefore the anthropoids of our day have not existed at any time since the middle of the Miocene period; when, like all cross breeds, they began to show a tendency, more and more marked as time went on, to return to the type of their first parent, the black and yellow gigantic Lemuro-Atlanteans. To search for the "Missing-Link" is useless..." SD I 184fn ** "These "Elementals" will become human Monads, in their turn, only at the next great planetary Manvantara." SD I 184 Source of the Spirit in Man (Atma-Buddhi-Manas) "...The Host of Dhyanis, whose turn it was to incarnate as the Egos of the immortal, but, on this plane, senseless monads--that some "obeyed" (the law of evolution) immediately when the men of the 3rd Race became physiologically and physically ready, i.e., when they had separated into sexes. These were those early conscious Beings who, now adding conscious knowledge and will to their inherent Divine purity, created by Kriyasakti the semi-Divine man, who became the seed on earth for future adepts. Those, on the other hand, who, jealous of their intellectual freedom (unfettered as it then was by the bonds of matter), said:--"We can choose...we have wisdom,"...and incarnated far later--these had their first Karmic punishment prepared for them. They got bodies (physiologically) inferior to their astral models, because their chhayas had belonged to progenitors of an inferior degree in the 7 classes. As to those "Sons of Wisdom" who had "deferred" their incarnation till the 4th Race, which was already tainted (physiologically) with sin and impurity, they produced a terrible cause, the Karmic result of which weighs on them to this day...the bodies they had to inform had become defiled through their own procrastination...This was the "Fall of the angels," because of their rebellion against Karmic Law. The "fall of man" was no fall, for he was irresponsible..." SD II 228 "...commentaries on the Puranas in general, and in the Book of Dzyan--especially...[imply ] a spiritual and divine nature of man independent of his physical body in this illusionary world, in which the false personality and its cerebral basis alone is known to orthodox psychology... "...man was on Earth in this Round from the beginning. "Having passed through all the kingdoms of nature in the previous three Rounds, * his physical frame--one adapted to the thermal conditions of those early periods--was ready to receive the divine Pilgrim at the dawn of human life, i.e., 18,000,000 years ago. It is only at the mid-point of the 3rd Root Race that man was endowed with Manas. Once united, the two and then the three made one; for though the lower animals, from the amoeba to man, received their monads, in which all the higher qualities are potential, all have to remain dormant till each reaches its human form before which stage manas (mind) has no development in them. ** In the animals every principle is paralyzed, and in a fetus-like state save the second (vital) and the third ( the astral), and the rudiments of the fourth (Kama, which is desire, instinct) whose intensity and development varies and changes with the species...this theory...will finally lead to the recognition of a Universal Deity in nature, ever-present and as ever invisible, and unknowable, and of intra-Cosmic gods, who all were men." SD II 154-5 * "Follow the law of analogy"--the Masters teach. Atma-Buddhi is dual and Manas is triple; inasmuch as the former has two aspects and the latter three, i.e., as a principle per se, which gravitates, in its higher aspect to Atma-Buddhi, and follows, in its lower nature, Kama, the seat of terrestrial and animal desires and passions. Now compare the evolution of the Races, the First and the Second of which are of the nature of Atma-Buddhi, their passive Spiritual progeny, and the Third Root-Race shows three distinct divisions or aspects physiologically and psychically; the earliest, sinless; the middle portions awakening to intelligence; and the third and last decidedly animal: i.e., Manas succumbs to the temptations of Kama." SD II 254-5fn ** "Men are made complete only during their third, toward the fourth cycle (race). They are made "gods" for good and evil, and responsible only when the two arcs meet (after the 3 1/2 rounds towards the fifth Race). They are made so by the Nirmanakaya (spiritual or astral remains) of the Rudra-Kumaras, "cursed to be reborn on earth again; meaning--doomed in their natural turn to reincarnation in the higher ascending arc of the terrestrial cycle." SD II 254-255fn "...the Monads have passed through all these forms of being up to man, on every planet [globe], in the Three preceding Rounds..." SD II 256 "...it is of course an absurdity to talk of the "development" of a Monad, or to say that it becomes "Man."...a Monad cannot either progress or develop, or even be affected by the changes of states it passes through. It is not of this world or plane, and may be compared only to an indestructible star of divine light and fire, thrown down on to our Earth as a plank of salvation for the personalities in which it indwells. It is for the latter to cling to it; and thus partaking of its divine nature, obtain immortality. Left to itself the Monad will cling to no one; but, like the "plank," will be drifted away to another incarnation by the unresting current of evolution." SD I 174-5 fn The Sun of Mind-Intelligence Induced in Man's "Spark." "...divine man dwelt in his animal--though externally human --form; and, if there was instinct in him, no self-consciousness came to enlighten the darkness of the latent 5th principle [Manas]. When moved by the law of Evolution, the Lords of Wisdom infused into him the spark of consciousness, the first feeling it awoke to life and activity was a sense of solidarity, of one-ness with his spiritual creators. As the child's first feeling is for its mother and nurse, so the first aspirations of the awakening consciousness in primitive man were for those whose element he felt within himself, and who yet were outside, and independent of him. Devotion arose out of that feeling, and became the first and foremost motor in his nature; for it is the only one which is natural in our heart, which is innate in us, and which we find alike in human babe and the young of the animal. This feeling of irrepressible, instinctive aspiration in primitive man ...(211) It lives undeniably, and has settled in all its ineradicable strength and power in the Asiatic Aryan heart from the 3rd Race direct through it first "mind-born" sons,--the fruits of Kriyasakti. As time rolled on the holy caste of Initiates produced but rarely, and from age to age, such perfect creatures: beings apart, inwardly, though the same as those who produced them, outwardly...the 3rd primitive race...was called into being, a ready and perfect vehicle for the incarnating denizens of higher spheres, who took forthwith their abodes in these forms born of Spiritual Will and the natural divine power in man. Its physical frame alone was of time and of life, as it drew its intelligence direct from above. It was the living tree of divine wisdom; and may therefore be likened to the Mundane Tree of the Norse Legend, which cannot wither and die until the last battle of life shall be fought, and while its roots are gnawed all the time by the dragon Niddhogg; for even so, the first and holy son of Kriyasakti had his body gnawed by the tooth of time, but the roots of his inner being remained for ever undecaying and strong, because they grew and expanded in heaven not on earth. He was the first of the FIRST, and he was the seed of all the others. There were other "Sons of Kriyasakti" produced by a second spiritual effort, but the first one has remained to this day the Seed of divine Knowledge, the One and the Supreme among the terrestrial "Sons of Wisdom." SD I 210-211 What of our Future as Sun-Men ? "Our 4th Round Humanity has its one grand cycle, and so have her races and sub-races. The "curious rush" is due to the double effect of the former--the beginning of its downward course;--and of the latter (the small cycle of your "sub-race") running on to its apex...you belong to the 5th Race, yet you are but a Western sub-race. Notwithstanding your efforts, what you call civilization is confined only to the latter and its off-shoots in America. Radiating around, its deceptive light may seem to throw its rays on a greater distance than it does on reality.--There is no "rush" in China, and of Japan you make but a caricature...What do you know of America, for instance, before the invasion of that country by the Spaniards? Less than 2 centuries prior to the arrival of Cortez there was as great a "rush" towards progress among the sub-races of Peru and Mexico as there is now in Europe and the U.S.A. Their sub-race ended in nearly total annihilation through causes generated by itself; so will yours at the end of its cycle...We may speak of the "stagnant condition" into which, following the law of development, growth, maturity and decline every race and sub-race falls into during its transition period. It is the latter condition your Universal History is acquainted with, while it remains superbly ignorant of the condition even India was in, some 10 centuries back. Your sub-races are now running towards the apex of their respective cycles, and that History goes no further back than the periods of decline of a few other sub-races belonging most of them to the preceding 4th Race...a few, miserable dozens of centuries...Beyond--all is darkness for it, nothing but hypotheses." M L 149-50 "At each Round there are less and less animals--the latter evoluting into higher forms. During the first Round it is they that were the "kings of creation." During the 7th men will have become Gods and animals--intelligent beings. Draw your inference. Beginning with the second round, already evolution proceeds on quite a different plan. Everything is evolved and has but to proceed on its cyclic journey and get perfected. It is only the first Round that man becomes from a human being on Globe B, a mineral, a plant an animal on Planet C. The method changes entirely from the second Round..." M L 177-8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 19:25:31 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Krishnamurti on CWL's Clairvoyance Here is an interesting excerpt from a conversation between Gonzalez and Krishnaji. K's comment on CWL is to be noted. > I said, "I worry the schools are going to become elitist and that > only the wealthy will be able to send their children to them." > > Krishnamurti said: "We have to work with what we have and we have > to talk with the words we have. I was born in a very poor home and > some of my brothers died from tuberculosis or malnutrition. But > look at me! I'm doing very well, huh?" > > I said, "you were lucky you had teachers like Leadbeater who was > even clairvoyant." > > Krishnamurti said, "Yes, I was very lucky. Leadbeater was > temporarily clairvoyant, and I was lucky that everything he said > entered through my right ear and left through the left." > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 19:28:38 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Christmas - Coming of the World Teacher Here is an excerpt from a post from listening-l. mkr ============================== Courier NewHere is a fable K wrote when he was still fairly young: Once upon a time -- which is the way in which all true stories begin -- there was a world in which all the people were sick and sad, and yet all of them were seeking to be released from their suffering and to find happiness. In search of this happiness they prayed, they worshipped, they loved and they hated, they married and made wars. They begot children as miserable as themselves and yet they taught those children that happiness was their right and their eventual goal. Then one day in the midst of this suffering world there rose a whisper, which grew into a shout, that a Great Teacher was coming who, because of his love for the world and because of his wisdom, would bring to those who were suffering, comfort in their sorrow, and would show all the people in the world how they might find the lasting happiness which all were seeking. And in order to spread widely the glad news of the coming of the Teacher, organizations and societies were formed, and men and women went throughout the world telling of the Teacher who would come. Some prayed to him that he would come more quickly. Some performed ceremonies in order to prepare the world to receive him. Some made profound studies of forgotten times, when other great Teachers had come and taught, so that by this study they might better understand him. Some proclaimed themselves his disciples in advance, so that when he came there might be some at least to stand around him and to understand him. Then one day he came. And he told the people of the world that he had come to bring them happiness, to heal their pain and to soothe their sorrows. He said that he himself, through much suffering and pain, had found his way to an abode of peace, to a KIngdom of eternal Joy. He told them that he had come to lead them and to guide them to that abode. But, he said, because the path leading to that Kingdom was steep and narrow, only those could follow him who were willing to set aside everything that they had accumulated in the past. He asked them to set aside their Gods, their religions, their rites and ceremonies, their books and their knowledge, their families and friends. And if they would do that, he said, he would provide them with the living water he possessed, and would bring them into the Kingdom of Happiness where he himself dwelt eternally. Then those people, who for so many years had been preparing for the Teacher, began to feel uncomfortable and troubled. For they said: "This is not the teaching we expected and for which we have been preparing. How can we renounce all this knowledge which we have so painfully acquired? Without it the world would never understand the Teacher. How can we renounce all these splendid rites and ceremonies in the performing of which we we find so much happiness and power? How can we renounce our families and friends when we need them so much? What teaching is this? And they began to question among themselves: "Can this indeed be the Teacher whom we have been expecting? WE never thought he would speak in this way and ask of us such renounciations." And those especially who had proclaimed themselves his disciples, because of their more intimate knowledge of his will, felt uncomfortable and troubled. Then after much thought and meditation light came to them and a solution to their difficulties. And they said: "It is true that the Teacher comes to help the world, but we know the world better than he does and so we will act as his interpreters to the world." And so those who had knowledge said: "HIs call for renunciation does not apply to us because the world needs our knowledge and could not do without it, so for the sake of the world we shall go on seeking knowledge." And those who perormed rites and ceremonies said: "We have of course renounced all rites and ceremonies or our own benefit, we have passed beyond any need of them, but for the sake of the world we shall continue to peform them, otherwise the world would suffer." So they continued to build Churches and Temples and to perform rites, all to help the world, and they were too busy to listen to the Teacher. And the only people who willingly renounced were those who gave up their homes and their families because they wanted freedom from duty and obligation. And they came to the Teacher and said: "We have left all to follow you, now find us an easy job where we can work for you and also earn a living." Some there were, a few, who set all things aside, and sat at the feet of the Teacher, and tried to learn from him how they might feed the hungry and satisfy the thirsty. These people thought that his wisdom was likely to prove more helpful to the world than their knowledge; that his simplicity might be more easily understood than their complications; that the Teacher might know best when he said that rites and ceremonies were not necessary for finding the happiness he came to give; that you could renounce your family and friends in your heart while not deserting them in the flesh. But the others reproached them for their selfishness and idleness. They said: "The world does not need the bread of the Teacher, but a particular kind of pastry for which we hoild the recipe. It does not need water to quench its thirst, but the wine contained in our chalices. The words of your Teacher will not help the world, because they are too simple and the world cannot understand what they mean. We have complicated theories to solve the complicated problems of the world and the world can understand them." So there were few of those who had most eagerly announced the coming of the Teacher who listened to the teaching he gave. There were some who said: "This is not the Teacher we expected, so we will go on preparing for the coming of the real Teacher." And the pthers built up walls and barriers round him so that none could get to him unless they opened the gates. So in a few years he went away and then the same people hailed him as divinely inspired, and they built new Churches in his name and invented new and elaborate rites and ceremonies for his glory, and built a new religion founded upon the teaching he had not given. And the world continued to suffer and cry for help. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 08:43:25 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Waiting for the Messenger==WHO IS HPB ? Did she commit fraud ? In a message dated 12/21/98 7:06:51 PM Central Standard Time, bartl@sprynet.com writes: << It could have been real. It also could have been set up in case an effect was needed. We do not know if the professor mentioned any other effects, or if this was the only one he mentioned. If the former, he would most certainly have forgotten the ones that did not take place. That form of selective memory is a standard tool in a professional magician's arsenal. Very often, the description of a magician's trick truly is impossible, because the magician works hard to make the key as unnoticeable as possible. >> And it could have been both real and sleight of hand. The study of both are part of an authentic tradition, and, the manifestation of real paranormal phenomena is often, on purpose for a variety of reasons, acompanied by sleight of hand. Why? Well one reason is that siddhis do not work right unless the mind is purified and set in order. There is a study of how real Siddhis manifest given various states of impure mind. And actually, ultimately, all siddhis are impure to the extent that in its ultimate state the mind is those powers at root. But the study of sleight of hand was by far the more important study. It was a study in self-knowledge. That is, it was a study of the sleeping mind's weakness for constant distraction, mis-directed attention, and suggestibility. Many forget that another meaning of maya is to be hypnotized. Without some stable measure of moral presence (dhyana as permanent state of wakefulness or samadhi in some traditions) of the I that is no longer evasively taken by the world, the ordinary mind is an on-going process of self-distraction, mis-attention, mis-perception, and suggestibility. To study sleight of hand is to come to a knowledge of the many ways the mind can deceive itself in suggestibility. The early difficulties in meditation are the same study conducted from another interior line. Ultimately, it is the preliminary line of self-encounter in facing the many emotional and ethically problematic ways we evade self and others in personal relationships. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 08:52:23 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Waiting for the Messenger==WHO IS HPB ? Did she commit fraud ? In a message dated 12/21/98 7:06:51 PM Central Standard Time, bartl@sprynet.com writes: << WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU GETTING ALL THIS FROM???????? DID YOU EVEN READ WHAT I WROTE, OR ARE YOU SO BLINDED BY A FUNDAMENTALIST RELIGIOUS VIEW OF THEOSOPHY THAT ANY HINT OF ANY IMPERFECTION IN ANY OF THE FOUNDERS IS BLASPHEMY?????? >> A teaching is a kind of energy. There are different qualities of energy. I remember a very wise man once told me that one measure of how high up the source of a teaching was, that is, its authenticity and quality, was partly determined by (1) the intelligent quality of people it drew who remained their own inquirers (i.e. there are two forces at work in seekers that struggle with each other: the real quest and out of insecurity the need to become a true believer.) That is, their quest was stronger (perhaps made stronger by the assistance rendered by the teaching they encountered) than their insecurity that prompted them to become fundamentalists and end all questing. And (2), the other measure was determined by how long it took a teaching to become nothing but the belief system of fundamentalistic true believers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 12:46:58 From: "Grigor Ananikian" Subject: Re: Round and round and round On 11/25/98, "M K Ramadoss " wrote: > At 10:49 PM 11/24/1998 -0700, kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > >Don't look at me, though. I've not a clue to what "I" am or what the > >"universe" is or what "Beness" is - probably just all words for the same > >thing. . .as are ALL words, really. Hmmm, Jerry's question number three??? > > > > > >Kym > > You are not alone. > > Looking for someone who knows about these things first hand and can be > independently verified. First hand knowledge is not good enough. Crazy person has first hand knowledge of being crazy but that does not make them therapist or authority. Quality of experience is also hierarchically graded. Not just any firsthand experience will do. One must be guided to the right kind of experience by teacher who was guided to it and so on. Plato ranks knowledge. What many miss is that this knowledge is not just head information but a form of participation in reality or experience. In otherwords, not all experiences, even firsthand, are equal. So, the question becomes, who has the right kind of first hand knowledge. Otherwise, one may end up like poor Russian who developed a split personality: his original one and new one. They kept arguing with each other about fine point in Russian Orthodox spirituality concerning sex and hypnosis. Since the poor Russian's original personality always lost the argument, he mistakenly concluded his new personality must be a "higher source." His name was Rasputin. Everyone likes big questions, as if they are qualified, before they have mastered little questions or habits. Reminds me of so-called great adept who was on lecture circuit lecturing on big questions about nature of true self and self-mastery. Yet, he was in very irritable mood because he had stupid McDonald's hamburger jingo running through his mind all day. Some self-mastery indeed. Grigor Vahan Ananikian ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 00:12:10 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Round and round and round Grigor Ananikian writes >> Looking for someone who knows about these things first hand and can be >> independently verified. > >First hand knowledge is not good enough. Crazy person has first hand >knowledge of being crazy but that does not make them therapist or >authority. You seem to have missed Kym's qualification: "... and can be independently verified" - which means you have addressed a post she did not write. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 00:05:52 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Waiting for the Messenger==WHO IS HPB ? Did she commit fraud ? Bart Lidofsky writes (To Dallas): > WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU GETTING ALL THIS >FROM???????? DID YOU EVEN READ >WHAT I WROTE, OR ARE YOU SO BLINDED BY A >FUNDAMENTALIST RELIGIOUS VIEW >OF THEOSOPHY THAT ANY HINT OF ANY IMPERFECTION IN >ANY OF THE FOUNDERS IS >BLASPHEMY?????? That's how it looks to me and many others. Very sad, and a denial of the second object, IMO. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 22:49:37 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Round and round and round In a message dated 12/22/98 6:21:37 PM Central Standard Time, guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk writes: << Grigor Ananikian writes >> Looking for someone who knows about these things first hand and can be >> independently verified. > >First hand knowledge is not good enough. Crazy person has first hand >knowledge of being crazy but that does not make them therapist or >authority. You seem to have missed Kym's qualification: "... and can be independently verified" - which means you have addressed a post she did not write. >> Apparently not, since it was in the pasted quote. Who independently verifies? And i was not aware it was a Kym who said this, it seemed to be a MK something or other. I agreed with the post but felt it needed some correction. Your comment is irrelevant to the substance of what was posted. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 23:10:21 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: What do we do with those who want war? Doss wrote: >This whole Iraq situation is purely political. All they want to is to get >rid of Hussain by any means. Those who support any bombing have no idea >what it is to be on the receiving end. It is the common man woman and child >who are being hurt. I do think many of those who "support" bombings and wars do know that it is, ultimately, the innocents that suffer. However, I have read biographies of those who, during WWII, were in concentration camps that found themselves cherring and finding hope every time they saw Allied bombing planes flying overhead. Of course, the German citizens found no such hope and were very frightened - and many innocent men, women, and children were killed or horribly maimed. In the case of the people of Kuwait, they are comforted to see that Iraq is being "controlled" as they know what Iraq is capable of and is willing to do. But at the same time, the citizens of Iraq are going without medical care, food, and other necessities. For every war and bombing, there are some who find relief and liberation; others find death and destruction. It would be so much easier if we didn't have people like Hitler and Hussein who do not care who suffers and dies, but we do - and it still remains a mystery on what is supposed to be done. If Iraq was "left alone" - would that mean a stop to suffering or would Hussein simply rebuild his weapons as he has promised? That is the choice the world is faced with. . .for those who have better alternatives, let them speak - but they must keep in mind the Kurds, the people of Kuwait, the people of Israel, and the people of Iraq. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:17:41 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Waiting for the Messenger==WHO IS HPB ? Did she commit fraud ? Dec 21st 1998 Dear Bart: If what you write can be substantiated, please give me the references to check. I want primary and not 2nd or 3rd level sources, please. Or, are you basing yourself on hearsay ? I quote your posting in part: ========================================================== W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > I read your recent positing, and I read with chagrin that you see > fit to reproduce (without and proof or additional supporting > facts, the old calumny that HPB is supposed (by some writers and > detractors) to have practiced fraud. What escapes my > comprehension is why should she have done this ? Further, who > are they to determine that they have doubts and suspicions of > here. What are they based on? Do you have them to share with me > ? She did commit fraud. She stated that the Mahatmas produced phenomena that she, herself produced. Moria got so angry about it, he broke his pipe. At least according to Koot Hoomi. > I would say from having read and researched most of the early > literature (books, articles, magazines, letters, etc...) of the > Theos. Movement of this era, that HPB had no reason to do > anything that was not honest and straightforward. She wanted to demonstrate that there was more to the world than one's senses could detect. Faked Sidhi's can demonstrate that almost as well as the real thing. As far as the rest of your statement goes, you are going way beyond my statement. I stated that almost certainly (leaving room for a shadow of a doubt), HPB faked AT LEAST SOME of her phenomena. The phrase "at least some" can and should be taken to mean that at least some were not faked. And I then pointed out that, even if she did so, she did so to prove a point that could be proven by faked Sidhi's. ========================================= Bell ringing was common among fraudulent spiritualists. Have you read A MODERN PANARION on HPB's phenomena described there ? Have your read Olcott's OLD DIARY LEAVES ? Have you read Sylvia Cranston's "HPB " ? Have you been through the first few volumes of BLAVATSKY, COLLECTED WORKS ? There you will find printed most if not all of the early correspondence and newspaper exchanges between HPB and her contemporaries. If you trying to employ the "Hodgson Report" - that has been shown defective. Have you read Vernon Harrison's Monograph on the authenticity of the MAHATMA LETTERS ? [ Published recently by TUP, Pasadena ]. Fortunately "bell-ringing" is not the basis for denigrating HPB's integrity, or her "phenomena". What do you think of the shower of roses produced at the request of a visiting German professor who called on her (without prior notice)in Benares ? He asked her towards the end of the interview if the reports of Vedic Sages being able to create a shower of flowers was true and possible - and she demonstrated it as a fact, immediately, the last rose falling on his departing nose. And the MAHATMA LETTERS has much more to teach than small details about the Master Moriya "breaking his pipe." Or do you not think that some 400 pages of Their letters is to be summarized and dismissed in such a cavalier fashion ? In my esteem the writing of THE SECRET DOCTRINE and ISIS UNVEILED is a demonstration of "phenomena" far beyond anyone's present capabilities - and if that is not conclusive phenomena then, what is ? But one has to take a lot of time to study that if one desires to be competent to criticize HPB and the philosophy of Theosophy. Try and put the whole of her work and life into perspective. If "bell-ringing" is the only thing that is important or suspect - to you - then that is very "small potatoes." And you were not there, nor was I, and hence the best we can do is to adduce for our judgment what others have written and said. But we are not entitled to be selective, we have to consider all the evidence. None of those writers that I have read have ever challenged HPB on the basis of simple "bell-ringing." Have they ? If so, where ? Is THEOSOPHY to be jettisoned because of an unproven accusation ? If so, it is flimsy indeed, and does not deserve further consideration by serious thinkers ! is that what you mean ? To me the ethical and moral implications of Theosophical philosophy and the underlying esotericism and occultism would be entirely vitiated if HPB had at any time been fraudulent. As far as I am aware the kind of calumny arose starting with the Hodgson report - which has proved to be entirely unreliable if not dishonest. What is the nature and range of the claims that HPB was "fraudulent" Have you investigated ? Do you have any data or references to offer to us who read what you write ? should we put our trust in you alone for an unsubstantiated opinion ? In my esteem your responses show you have neither cause nor ability to try to demean her if you are using 2nd and 3rd level "sources." She certainly cannot be "dragged down" to "our very ordinary level." And the repetition of unfounded "gossip" is quite unworthy of these pages. And that is my opinion. Now, may I see what facts you have ? Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:19:06 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: THE GREAT MASTER WROTE CONCERNING THE DESTINY OF THE T S Dec 21st Dallas offers: It was W. Q. Judge in his article THE CLOSING CYCLE "Irish > Theosophist" January 1895 who wrote: > > "H. P. Blavatsky has clearly pointed out in the KEY, in her > conclusion, that the plan is to keep the T.S. alive as an active, > free, unsectarian body during all the time of waiting for the > next great messenger, who will be herself beyond question....And > in all this time of waiting the Master, "that great Initiate, > whose single will upholds the entire movement," will have his > mighty hand spread out wide behind the society." [ ULT Edn. Of > WQJ ARTICLES, VOL. 2, P. 153 ] > > De Puruker no doubt picked his statement from that. Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 15:58:21 From: "Grigor Ananikian" Subject: Re: Jerry's Responses to Dallas Hello, In following this debate between Dallas and Jerry, the following reflections occur. First, it might be that HPB put, as one of her blinds, a portrayal of other traditions that was not wholly accurate so that her more sensitive/intelligent followers would have to follow up on her led on their own. Finding some answers on one's own is one of the ways a teacher puts the responsibility of what one believes or says one knows upon oneself (something a fundamentalist of any strip does not like). I know of two individuals from the Esoteric Section that have said something to this effect. And/or, she didn't have the information we have now but gave a pointer. Second, sometimes, HPB's descriptions of Tantric Buddhism may depart from the contemporary presentations of it for three reasons. First, the Tibetans were as vigorous in how they looked down on "Hinayana" in the 19th century as she was. Second, her contacts were with the Panchen Lama. While all forms of Vajrayana are historically and spiritually inter-related, there are some strains of Tantric Buddhism that are not the Lhasa forms of them. Recently, for example, a consensus has been reached that Bon is really an even earlier form of Tantric Buddhism than the Nymingmapa (Old School). Mongolian Tantric Buddhism, while under the Dalai Lama, has some marked differences, including a myth of cosmological origins, including a war in heaven with earth being the last stronghold of the evil forces. There is a Tibetan variant of this tale mentioned by the scholar Tucci who thinks it reflects another Zoroastrian influence on Tantric Buddhism (there are many). Moreover, Japanese Tantric Shingon differs in a number a ways from known Tibetan forms that reflect Central Asian forms of Tantric Buddhism. For example, Shingon, like Central Asian Tantric Buddhism, posits a true atman over and above anatman (anatman is clever means/vehicle to be abandoned in ultimate state). Beyond the highest known Tibetan/Mahayana level, in Shingon the goku mujisho-shin or "mind of ultimate no-self nature", there is the Secret Mind of the true I that truly becomes itself when it becomes free of the last great vehicle/insight that is now the last obstacle, namely, attachment to void/no self nature of self. This level is called in Shingon himitsu shogon shin or Secret Mind of True Self. Some have posited a Taoist influence here on Shingon but others have suggested a Central Asian origin since the same concept shows up there (which may still not eliminate a Taoist influence since it and Zoroastrianism were the big religious traditions of Central Asia when Buddhism developed there and incorporated some elements of these two religions). Also, there have been some doubts as to where HPB may have been in Tibet or if she ever was (as opposed to Tantric Buddhist regions of Kashmir, Lahore, Bhutan, etc.) with a variety of suggestions why she might have said it was Tibet (other than cupable lying). Finally, we know that HPB was acquainted with at least one form of Central Asian Tantric Buddhism, that of the Kalmucks. Their Tantric Buddhism differs in several respects from the current "normative" Nyingmapa, Karmapa, Kagyupa, or Gelukpa forms of Tibetan Tantric Buddhism. So, the point here is that, without more information, it is difficult to judge the accuracy of HPB's knowledge of Tantric Buddhism in comparison with contemporary presentations (and accurate) of Tibetan Buddhism because it may not be the form she knew. Oh, and hello to the board! This is my first post. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 16:31:17 From: "Grigor Ananikian" Subject: Re: Kamamudra = Kundalini = Will == Motive On 12/05/98, ""W. Dallas TenBroeck" " wrote: > Dec 4th 1998 > > Dallas offers: > > In several postings I notice questions flying back and forth > concerning tantrika instructions and in particular those > concerned with Kamamudra, Kundalini, Meditation ( and its > effects) and I wonder that (what seems to me) to be the basic > idea behind these considerations does not seem to ring out clear. > To me it is MOTIVE. > > Why are these things done or investigated ? Curiosity, the > search for personal power or domination ? And, if there is some > knowledge attained, what then ? What does the attainment of > information or of some "power" (?) confer ? > > A study of Buddhism, Lamaism, Tantrikaism, etc... provide what as > a conclusion? I'm not sure I understand everything said in this post. But it seems a misconception of yabyum is at the basis of it. The feminine consort of a Buddha of the Mandala is Prajna. In embryonic form, as the bodhi seed, she is conscience. The Buddha is upaya, the skilled activation of Wisdom. The symbolism of sexual union comes in a very traditional culture where free sex and western hedonism (including western ego-hedonism of playing at spirituality and giving oneself fancy lodge-decree titles such as made Krishnamurti sick) are strongly condemned. The symbol is one of an inner kind of marriage. It is the marriage of awareness to conscience (although both awareness and conscience have undergone a major inner evolution). In ordinary humans, conscience is a weak knowledge of right and wrong (wisdom pre-school 101). Tanha, or desire, is a form of self-concern that places self before others. So, often, there is inner conflict between what one wants to do and what one ought to do. Unfortunately, sex as powerful force is often the victimized vehicle for the playing out of the tanhic ego. Tanha rides piggy-backed on sex. So, yabyum means that there is in the Buddha a permanent (can't be divorced) marriage of his awareness and all his energies to conscience in an inner fusion so strong that conscience is a stronger force than sex and tanha is destroyed. But conscience has revealed herself to be the Wisdom of the Dharmabody. Thus, the Adi Buddha and Samanabhadra are the two most often show in yabyum. Conscience is a seed of a Wisdom of vast dimensions. Tantra is not about powers. Tantra = super-ethics. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 20:04:47 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Waiting for the Messenger==WHO IS HPB ? Did she commit fraud ? W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > If what you write can be substantiated, please give me the > references to check. I want primary and not 2nd or 3rd level > sources, please. Or, are you basing yourself on hearsay ? {quote from me deleted for brevity} > If you trying to employ the "Hodgson Report" - that has been > shown defective. Have you read Vernon Harrison's Monograph on > the authenticity of the MAHATMA LETTERS ? [ Published recently > by TUP, Pasadena ]. No, the Hodgson Report was not a report, it was a smear job. > Fortunately "bell-ringing" is not the basis for denigrating HPB's > integrity, or her "phenomena". What do you think of the shower of > roses produced at the request of a visiting German professor who > called on her (without prior notice)in Benares ? He asked her > towards the end of the interview if the reports of Vedic Sages > being able to create a shower of flowers was true and possible - > and she demonstrated it as a fact, immediately, the last rose > falling on his departing nose. It could have been real. It also could have been set up in case an effect was needed. We do not know if the professor mentioned any other effects, or if this was the only one he mentioned. If the former, he would most certainly have forgotten the ones that did not take place. That form of selective memory is a standard tool in a professional magician's arsenal. Very often, the description of a magician's trick truly is impossible, because the magician works hard to make the key as unnoticeable as possible. > And the MAHATMA LETTERS has much > more to teach than small details about the Master Moriya > "breaking his pipe." Or do you not think that some 400 pages of > Their letters is to be summarized and dismissed in such a > cavalier fashion ? Irrelevent. > In my esteem the writing of THE SECRET DOCTRINE and ISIS UNVEILED > is a demonstration of "phenomena" far beyond anyone's present > capabilities - and if that is not conclusive phenomena then, > what is ? But one has to take a lot of time to study that if one > desires to be competent to criticize HPB and the philosophy of > Theosophy. Where did I criticize THE SECRET DOCTRINE or ISIS UNVEILED? > Try and put the whole of her work and life into perspective. If > "bell-ringing" is the only thing that is important or suspect - > to you - then that is very "small potatoes." And you were not > there, nor was I, and hence the best we can do is to adduce for > our judgment what others have written and said. I did not say it was important, nor did I say that bell ringing was the only thing that was suspect. I was asked a question, and I used it as an example. > But we are not entitled to be selective, we have to consider all > the evidence. None of those writers that I have read have ever > challenged HPB on the basis of simple "bell-ringing." I did not challenge her writings, and was defending her intent. > Is THEOSOPHY to be jettisoned because of an > unproven accusation ? If so, it is flimsy indeed, and does not > deserve further consideration by serious thinkers ! is that what > you mean ? WHERE THE HELL ARE YOU GETTING ALL THIS FROM???????? DID YOU EVEN READ WHAT I WROTE, OR ARE YOU SO BLINDED BY A FUNDAMENTALIST RELIGIOUS VIEW OF THEOSOPHY THAT ANY HINT OF ANY IMPERFECTION IN ANY OF THE FOUNDERS IS BLASPHEMY?????? > To me the ethical and moral implications of Theosophical > philosophy and the underlying esotericism and occultism would be > entirely vitiated if HPB had at any time been fraudulent. If that statement is true then, in my opinion, you follow Theosophy for all the wrong reasons. Even the Mahatmas say not to believe what they say simply because it comes from them; one has to determine for one's self it is true. Which is the point I was trying to make in the first place: The Mahatmas, Blavatsky, and, for that matter, Leadbeater all stated, one way or another, that their beliefs should stand on their own, and need not be propped up by demonstrations of Siddhi's. > What is the nature and range of the claims that HPB was > "fraudulent" Have you investigated ? Do you have any data or > references to offer to us who read what you write ? should we > put our trust in you alone for an unsubstantiated opinion ? I simply stated a case where Koot Hoomi himself said that Blavatsky was fraudulent. Unless you take Blavatsky's word over his. That she thought her motives were good is irrelevent. > In my esteem your responses show you have neither cause nor > ability to try to demean her if you are using 2nd and 3rd level > "sources." She certainly cannot be "dragged down" to "our very > ordinary level." And the repetition of unfounded "gossip" is > quite unworthy of these pages. > > And that is my opinion. Now, may I see what facts you have ? Facts of science, or facts of faith? If the latter, well, you have your faith, and nothing I say or do will shake it. If the former, well, scientifically speaking, Occam's Razor puts the burden of proof on you that they WERE genuine; our initial assumption needs to be that it was done without Sidhi's unless it can be demonstrated that they were impossible without Sidhi's. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 15:50:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Peace .... This whole Iraq situation is purely political. All they want to is to get rid of Hussain by any means. Those who support any bombing have no idea what it is to be on the receiving end. It is the common man woman and child who are being hurt. mkr At 12:56 AM 12/17/1998 +0000, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >Let us extend our thoughts of horror and sadness at the plight of the >people of Iraq at this awful time; may they soon find peace. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 01:31:11 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Peace .... M K Ramadoss writes >This whole Iraq situation is purely political. All they want to is to get >rid of Hussain by any means. Those who support any bombing have no idea >what it is to be on the receiving end. It is the common man woman and child >who are being hurt. > >mkr > >At 12:56 AM 12/17/1998 +0000, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >>Let us extend our thoughts of horror and sadness at the plight of the >>people of Iraq at this awful time; may they soon find peace. Thanks, Doss. I lived through WWII. We were bombed. My aunt came home from work to find her whole street had been blasted into rubble. Later the Brits did the same to Dresden, Germany. My Grandfather was a medical orderly during the WWI. He got cut off from his unit in France (many did) and gave what first aid he could to whoever he found, regardless of nationality or military status. Many were civilians. Eventually he was picked up by another friendly unit. He never forgot what he saw. We had to learn as kids that shrapnel should not be picked up - it is often hot enough to burn you badly - I have even seen it glowing red in the street - we had dogfights overhead where we lived, and often saw planes spiralling down into the sea. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 04:54:08 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: FW: WHERE ARE WE ALL GOING ? Dec 20th According to the mail server the following was not delivered - if in fact it was delivered, I apologize for duplicating it. Dallas > -----Original Message----- > From: W. Dallas TenBroeck [mailto:dalval@nwc.net] > Sent: Friday, December 18, 1998 3:26 PM > To: > Subject: WHERE ARE WE ALL GOING ? > > Dec 19th 1998 > > A Long Journey for the Man-Sun > > "...the Monad had passed through, journeyed and been imprisoned > in, every transitional form throughout every kingdom of nature > during the three preceding Rounds. But the monad which becomes > human is not the Man. In this Round-with the exception of the > highest mammals after man, the anthropoids destined to die out in > this our race, when their monads will be liberated and pass into > the astral human forms (or the highest elementals) of the Sixth * > and the Seventh Races, and then into lowest human forms in the > fifth Round-no units of either of the kingdoms are animated any > longer by monads destined to become human in their next stage, > but only by the lower Elementals of their respective realms. ** > * Nature never repeats herself, therefore the anthropoids of our > day have not existed at any time since the middle of the Miocene > period; when, like all cross breeds, they began to show a > tendency, more and more marked as time went on, to return to the > type of their first parent, the black and yellow gigantic > Lemuro-Atlanteans. To search for the "Missing-Link" is > useless..." SD I 184fn > > ** "These "Elementals" will become human Monads, in their turn, > only at the next great planetary Manvantara." SD I 184 > > Source of the Spirit in Man (Atma-Buddhi-Manas) > > "...The Host of Dhyanis, whose turn it was to incarnate as the > Egos of the immortal, but, on this plane, senseless monads-that > some "obeyed" (the law of evolution) immediately when the men of > the 3rd Race became physiologically and physically ready, i.e., > when they had separated into sexes. These were those early > conscious Beings who, now adding conscious knowledge and will to > their inherent Divine purity, created by Kriyasakti the > semi-Divine man, who became the seed on earth for future adepts. > Those, on the other hand, who, jealous of their intellectual > freedom (unfettered as it then was by the bonds of matter), > said:--"We can choose...we have wisdom,"...and incarnated far > later-these had their first Karmic punishment prepared for them. > They got bodies (physiologically) inferior to their astral > models, because their chhayas had belonged to progenitors of an > inferior degree in the 7 classes. As to those "Sons of Wisdom" > who had "deferred" their incarnation till the 4th Race, which was > already tainted (physiologically) with sin and impurity, they > produced a terrible cause, the Karmic result of which weighs on > them to this day...the bodies they had to inform had become > defiled through their own procrastination...This was the "Fall of > the angels," because of their rebellion against Karmic Law. The > "fall of man" was no fall, for he was irresponsible..." SD > II 228 > > "...commentaries on the Puranas in general, and in the Book of > Dzyan-especially...[imply ] a spiritual and divine nature of man > independent of his physical body in this illusionary world, in > which the false personality and its cerebral basis alone is known > to orthodox psychology... > > "...man was on Earth in this Round from the beginning. > "Having passed through all the kingdoms of nature in the previous > three Rounds, * his physical frame-one adapted to the thermal > conditions of those early periods-was ready to receive the divine > Pilgrim at the dawn of human life, i.e., 18,000,000 years ago. > It is only at the mid-point of the 3rd Root Race that man was > endowed with Manas. Once united, the two and then the three made > one; for though the lower animals, from the amoeba to man, > received their monads, in which all the higher qualities are > potential, all have to remain dormant till each reaches its human > form before which stage manas (mind) has no development in them. > ** In the animals every principle is paralyzed, and in a > fetus-like state save the second (vital) and the third ( the > astral), and the rudiments of the fourth (Kama, which is desire, > instinct) whose intensity and development varies and changes with > the species...this theory...will finally lead to the recognition > of a Universal Deity in nature, ever-present and as ever > invisible, and unknowable, and of intra-Cosmic gods, who all were > men." > SD II 154-5 > * "Follow the law of analogy"-the Masters teach. Atma-Buddhi is > dual and Manas is triple; inasmuch as the former has two aspects > and the latter three, i.e., as a principle per se, which > gravitates, in its higher aspect to Atma-Buddhi, and follows, in > its lower nature, Kama, the seat of terrestrial and animal > desires and passions. Now compare the evolution of the Races, > the First and the Second of which are of the nature of > Atma-Buddhi, their passive Spiritual progeny, and the Third > Root-Race shows three distinct divisions or aspects > physiologically and psychically; the earliest, sinless; the > middle portions awakening to intelligence; and the third and > last decidedly animal: i.e., Manas succumbs to the temptations > of Kama." SD II 254-5fn > > ** "Men are made complete only during their third, toward the > fourth cycle (race). They are made "gods" for good and evil, and > responsible only when the two arcs meet (after the 3 1/2 rounds > towards the fifth Race). They are made so by the Nirmanakaya > (spiritual or astral remains) of the Rudra-Kumaras, "cursed to be > reborn on earth again; meaning-doomed in their natural turn to > reincarnation in the higher ascending arc of the terrestrial > cycle." SD II 254-255fn > > "...the Monads have passed through all these forms of being up > to man, on every planet [globe], in the Three preceding > Rounds..." SD II 256 > > "...it is of course an absurdity to talk of the "development" of > a Monad, or to say that it becomes "Man."...a Monad cannot either > progress or develop, or even be affected by the changes of states > it passes through. It is not of this world or plane, and may be > compared only to an indestructible star of divine light and fire, > thrown down on to our Earth as a plank of salvation for the > personalities in which it indwells. It is for the latter to > cling to it; and thus partaking of its divine nature, obtain > immortality. Left to itself the Monad will cling to no one; but, > like the "plank," will be drifted away to another incarnation by > the unresting current of evolution." > SD I 174-5 fn > > The Sun of Mind-Intelligence Induced in Man's "Spark." > > "...divine man dwelt in his animal-though externally human-form; > and, if there was instinct in him, no self-consciousness came to > enlighten the darkness of the latent 5th principle [Manas]. When > moved by the law of Evolution, the Lords of Wisdom infused into > him the spark of consciousness, the first feeling it awoke to > life and activity was a sense of solidarity, of one-ness with his > spiritual creators. As the child's first feeling is for its > mother and nurse, so the first aspirations of the awakening > consciousness in primitive man were for those whose element he > felt within himself, and who yet were outside, and independent of > him. Devotion arose out of that feeling, and became the first > and foremost motor in his nature; for it is the only one which is > natural in our heart, which is innate in us, and which we find > alike in human babe and the young of the animal. This feeling of > irrepressible, instinctive aspiration in primitive man ...(211) > It lives undeniably, and has settled in all its ineradicable > strength and power in the Asiatic Aryan heart from the 3rd Race > direct through it first "mind-born" sons,--the fruits of > Kriyasakti. As time rolled on the holy caste of Initiates > produced but rarely, and from age to age, such perfect creatures: > beings apart, inwardly, though the same as those who produced > them, outwardly...the 3rd primitive race...was called into being, > a ready and perfect vehicle for the incarnating denizens of > higher spheres, who took forthwith their abodes in these forms > born of Spiritual Will and the natural divine power in man. Its > physical frame alone was of time and of life, as it drew its > intelligence direct from above. It was the living tree of divine > wisdom; and may therefore be likened to the Mundane Tree of the > Norse Legend, which cannot wither and die until the last battle > of life shall be fought, and while its roots are gnawed all the > time by the dragon Niddhogg; for even so, the first and holy son > of Kriyasakti had his body gnawed by the tooth of time, but the > roots of his inner being remained for ever undecaying and strong, > because they grew and expanded in heaven not on earth. He was > the first of the FIRST, and he was the seed of all the others. > There were other "Sons of Kriyasakti" produced by a second > spiritual effort, but the first one has remained to this day the > Seed of divine Knowledge, the One and the Supreme among the > terrestrial "Sons of Wisdom." > SD I 210-211 > > What of our Future as Sun-Men ? > > "Our 4th Round Humanity has its one grand cycle, and so have her > races and sub-races. The "curious rush" is due to the double > effect of the former-the beginning of its downward course;--and > of the latter (the small cycle of your "sub-race") running on to > its apex...you belong to the 5th Race, yet you are but a Western > sub-race. Notwithstanding your efforts, what you call > civilization is confined only to the latter and its off-shoots in > America. Radiating around, its deceptive light may seem to throw > its rays on a greater distance than it does on reality.-There is > no "rush" in China, and of Japan you make but a caricature...What > do you know of America, for instance, before the invasion of that > country by the Spaniards? Less than 2 centuries prior to the > arrival of Cortez there was as great a "rush" towards progress > among the sub-races of Peru and Mexico as there is now in Europe > and the U.S.A. Their sub-race ended in nearly total annihilation > through causes generated by itself; so will yours at the end of > its cycle...We may speak of the "stagnant condition" into which, > following the law of development, growth, maturity and decline > every race and sub-race falls into during its transition period. > It is the latter condition your Universal History is acquainted > with, while it remains superbly ignorant of the condition even > India was in, some 10 centuries back. Your sub-races are now > running towards the apex of their respective cycles, and that > History goes no further back than the periods of decline of a few > other sub-races belonging most of them to the preceding 4th > Race...a few, miserable dozens of centuries...Beyond-all is > darkness for it, nothing but hypotheses." > M L 149-50 > > "At each Round there are less and less animals-the latter > evoluting into higher forms. During the first Round it is they > that were the "kings of creation." During the 7th men will have > become Gods and animals-intelligent beings. Draw your > inference. Beginning with the second round, already evolution > proceeds on quite a different plan. Everything is evolved and > has but to proceed on its cyclic journey and get perfected. It > is only the first Round that man becomes from a human being on > Globe B, a mineral, a plant an animal on Planet C. The method > changes entirely from the second Round..." M L 177-8 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:22:47 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 Alan wrote: >Let us extend our thoughts of horror and sadness at the plight of the >people of Iraq at this awful time; may they soon find peace. I agree; however, the Iraqi people have been under seige for years. I believe that the bombings occuring right now are just adding to their suffering, but even after the bombings stop, their suffering will continue. Saddam Hussein appears to have gained weight; the people, however, still look as thin as ever. >For the honour of the USA and the American people, it is my personal >opinion that President Clinton should stand down voluntarily as soon >after this initial action as possible, so that whatever happens next is >conducted by someone who cannot be suspected of using the Gulf >situation to save their own skin. Have to disagree here. Most of the people in America (according to the latest polls) do not see nor suspect this as being a ploy for Clinton to avoid impeachment hearings. Those who are against him are trying to make the public believe that this just may be the case, but the evidence and the speech given by Tony Blair proves the opposite. It makes little sense that Great Britian would risk the lives of their people simply to aid Clinton in his domestic difficulties - nor will such an action change the minds of anyone who was FOR impeachment. For many people in America, to lose President Clinton due to the continued pummeling by those who want him gone, would be wrenching. And not to mention the great joy and power this will give to those who began the steady barrage of rumors and accusations back in Clinton's first year as President. Those who want him out are banking on the hopeful possibility that the people will just give up, get tired, and approve of Clinton resigning just to shut them all up. And, besides, the person who would replace him, Al Gore, has been subjected to the some of the same rumor and attack Clinton has endured. Mr. Gore has been accused of most everything except an extra-marital affair. I fail to see how Clinton resigning will restore honor to the USA - it might result in just the opposite. How can the USA be seen as honorable when a one of our Presidents - three times nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize and popular with the people - was, ultimately, persecuted out of office? Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 02:26:04 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 17, 1998 Dec 18TH 1998 Dear Kym: Excellent thinking and I enjoyed what you wrote. Only one thing I would say is that the "aphorisms on Karma" describe its operation as an impersonal Law which works all through the Universe. If, for instance we know that 2 + 2 = 4 everywhere and at all time (barring some mathematicians who try to find reasons why it doesn't) then we would not take time out to argue that point and we would all use the same idea. If one does good out of fear of reprisals, that is one way of looking at a reason for good choices. But as you say, it is far better to do "good" because one desires to be of assistance to others. The motive is quite different, and as I understand it, it is the motive that counts for progress. Biggest problem, as we both seem to agree is that we don't always know what is the best choice to make. Such being the case, I think if we impersonalize it, and think of what some other person might do if faced with our problem and the choices to be made, we might arrive at some ideal way of handling the situation. In most cases that takes a lot of courage. As 'FEAR OF REPRISALS" seems to lurk around the edges. Dal From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 01:51:35 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 14, 1998 == Does KARMA play favorites ? Dec 15th 1998 Dear Kym: You wrote: > Dallas wrote: "God" is given three "attributes:" omniscience, omnipresence and >omnipotence. Yes, but "God" is also given the attributes of Love and Forgiveness - enabling "God" to 'forget' and change a person or event immediately regardless of past circumstances (I'm not saying I agree with this view, but it is a very common belief among most people). Yet, karma does not - karma appears to keep some kind of list, like Santa, of who is good and who is bad. Karma does not "forgive" and in order to be "just" and "fair" (as karma is purported to be) it must be able to "forgive" and "forget." Can a judge be fair without compassion? Must all lawbreakers go to jail? Dallas suggests: Supposing that Karma was one of the agents of "God ?" Should not everyone assume that "God" is fair and just to everyone ? Forgiveness and Mercy in my way of thinking ought to be distributed fairly, or "God" plays favorites. On what basis would "God" do that ? And by the way, do we have one "God" or many "Gods" each described and visualized in the way any devotee of any faith thinks God is ? If we invoke the aspect of mercy and/or forgiveness, then what happens to the victims if something has been done to hurt them ? How does that get adjusted ? Who will do the adjusting ? I suppose that the evil-doer ought to be active in making restitution ? Supposing again, that everyone has a sense of right and wrong which is innate to them, so that they know without doubt what is a good act or a bad one, why would they "fear" retribution ? Why "confession ?" Why "repentance ?" Why "contrition ?" If there is going to be fear because of uncertainty, then would the wiser decision be to avoid doing harm to others ? If "God" has granted all his children knowledge and wisdom, then how does he set about getting them to regulate themselves ( not regulating one-another ? ). These questions have always puzzled me, and hence I have always felt that Law which I assume is fair and equal to all, might be also self-adjusting on a universal scale. I think if this were really so, then we would voluntarily adjust our own acts so as to live harmoniously with others. And that's why Karma, as an impersonal, universal and impartial Law has always appealed to me. I know that I am ultimately responsible for what I do and choose. So I have to take responsibility and not live in hope that somehow what evil I might do will be forgiven - that does not sound too sure to me. There is also the problem of doing good to others. When we are helpful then should we not be benefited by "God" in response to our efforts in that direction ? If so, then how would that be done ? Curiously enough, Plato, in one of his Dialogs ( The Laws ) takes up this point for discussion. What would you say ? Best wishes, Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 06:33:59 EST From: ZZZLEEPER@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 14, 1998 mkr, Nice sentiment, but isn't Music Distribution as a theosophical topic a bit of a stretch? Julien ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 07:10:46 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 14, 1998 A good question. Internet technology offers an outstanding opportunity to make theosophy available to the world. This opportunity is unparalleled to the leaps in technology in the past. While most of the theosophical classics are no longer under copyright restrictions, Internet offers an opportunity for theosophists to write and publish on Internet and make some money to keep them alive. On the other hand, publications also are not subject to any editorial censorship or editing which are ofter biased. So the authors are able to communicate directly with their readers. From a reader standpoint, the publications can be accessed at a very low cost and the low cost itself is likely to spur people to take the risk of spending a little money and see what the contents of the publication are. Also in many former east european countries, computer access is available while they cannot afford to buy books at the current prices. This is the reasoning that made me make the connection. Hope this helps. mkr At 06:33 AM 12/15/1998 EST, you wrote: >mkr, > >Nice sentiment, but isn't Music Distribution as a theosophical topic a bit of >a stretch? > >Julien > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 09:53:58 -0500 From: John E Mead Subject: The Theosophist : Theosophy on the move in England there is a small blurb in the new Theosophist (Adyar) which says the England group is defining new goals etc. to increase membership etc. I wanted to give everyone a heads-up on this. seemed contrary to facts we've seen in the past. peace john e. mead -------------------- John E. Mead, MSc. (DBA) 803-802-4659; Fx 803-802-4700; jmead@infoave.net Info Avenue Internet Services, LLC (ideas & words above are NOT those of InfoAve) -------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:24:42 GMT From: alpha@dircon.co.uk Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 14, 1998 Dear mkr How do you *subscribe* to this list? Only the details for unsubscribing come with the digest. Tony ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:47:52 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 14, 1998 >From a browser, just go to http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l and follow the instructions. If you still have problems, let me know. mkr alpha@dircon.co.uk wrote: > Dear mkr > How do you *subscribe* to this list? Only the details for unsubscribing > come with the digest. > Tony ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:33:35 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: FW: Theos-World Theosophical Glossary by H.P. Blavatsky > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of > Caldwell/Graye > Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 3:38 PM > To: theos-talk@theosophy.com; blafoun@azstarnet.com > Subject: Theos-World Theosophical Glossary by H.P. Blavatsky > > Dec 15th 1998 > > Dallas offers: > > Concerning HPB'S THE THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY. > > What I say below is my observation after using it regularly for > over 58 years. > > I have found a few errors, (facts not stated correctly - but > whether that was Mead or HPB I do not know) but otherwise it is > reliable. The errors or variances are not serious, and are > easily correctable. They hardly qualify in quantity or > importance to damn the whole book. I have also found > illuminating statements made there which illustrate some of the > occult and esoteric philosophical aspects of Theosophical > teachings - not to be found elsewhere. > > I do not understand how de Zircov has written such a scathing > opinion, as usually his scholarship is meticulous. He must have > found, on close examination, what I have found, and which anyone > who desires to devote time to such work, will find. > > As a result of this kind of study I have been able to verify that > Theosophy is cohesive and its coherency is systematically > traceable. > > I will add that this work has forced me to add a great number of > additional words (not Indexed in HPB's original Glossary) to the > list of definitions made - these are extracted from ISIS, SD and > other articles by HPB, where they are defined. > > I have checked against ISIS and SD almost every entry, and have > found corroboration, or textual reprinting of definitions or > statements made in the GLOSSARY to agree with the references made > originally in those two books, or HPB's Articles. > > To do this I read consecutively all the entries she made, and > cross-referenced them INSIDE the "Glossary." Then, as I read > through ISIS and the SD, I checked the words used there with > those in the GLOSSARY and placed notes at those entries for > future retrieval. > > In addition I came across so many other valuable references that > I was forced to have my book-binder insert a blank page between > the printed pages. I have used this for such storage of > references over the years and in some cases have been forced to > add additional sheets. > > Since HPB uses such a wide sweep of references taken from the > past, it is necessary for a student to do this, so as to assure > him or herself of the accuracy of Theosophical doctrines. > And, the historical and classical base from which statements are > made. If this is not done then the student is placing reliance > on "authority." > > What I write above is factual and is not written to make me > appear authoritative. It is for this reason when I state > something on behalf of Theosophy, I give references, so that > other students may cross-check what I say back to the original > sources. > > Best wishes, > > Dallas > > ============================== > > SUBJECT: Theosophical Glossary by H.P. Blavatsky > > Regarding previous emails posted to Theos-Talk, one of my > correspondents writes privately to me: > "The Glossary is . . . full of errors. . . . Had I the time I > would find dozens of entries I think are suspicious and > contradict earlier writings of HPB, especially the SD. > I. . . think Mead wrote a great deal of it, and it waited for > HPB's approval. After she died, the MSS. were simply published > without HPB's thoroughgoing edit. Much of what's in there is > from HPB, and I feel certain much is not. . . ." > > It would be most helpful not only for me but for the benefit of > other Blavatsky students, if my correspondent could find the time > and list 6 to 12 entries which she believes "are suspicious and > contradict earlier writings of HPB, especially the SD." I will > enquire about this. > In the meantime I am posting the gist of this on Theos-Talk, > hoping that other Blavatsky students may find the above comments > of some interest. Dallas, if you read this, what is your opinion > about these comments since I know you have made a special study > of THE THEOSOHICAL GLOSSARY? > I will post some of my own thoughts on THE THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY > in the near future. > > -- THEOSOPHY WORLD-Theosophical Talk-theos-talk@theosophy.com > Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and > teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting > of "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to > theos-talk-request@theosophy.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:13:12 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 13, 1998 Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > kymsmith@micron.net writes > >I must say: I personally postulate that the concept of karma is merely a > >tool to use - like heaven and hell - in order to keep people in line. > > It certainly *is* used this way - I expect you have noticed the vast > range of things that are due to "bad karma". Don't hear much about > "god karma" do we? One interpretation of karma not usually thought > of is that "karma" = "getting even" ...... save the ":Lords of Karma" a lot > of work, eh? The problem is when karma is thought of as reward and punishment. As you quite rightly point out, it is neither; it is getting even. Not getting revenge, but getting EVEN, in the sense of in balance. Karma is a teacher; it teaches you how to achieve balance. Therefore, in a sense, ALL karma is bad karma, as it is proof you haven't learned your lessons yet. Note, however, that one cannot be voluntarily the bearer of karma to someone else without creating some of one's own. Bart Lidofsky ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 01:45:57 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 13, 1998 Bart Lidofsky writes > The problem is when karma is thought of as reward and punishment. As >you quite rightly point out, it is neither; it is getting even. Not >getting revenge, but getting EVEN, in the sense of in balance. Yep. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 01:39:16 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: The Theosophist : Theosophy on the move in England John E Mead writes >there is a small blurb in the new Theosophist (Adyar) >which says the England group is defining new goals etc. >to increase membership etc. Sorry folks -they have been doing this every year since I joined. According to the National council Report for Spring 1998 (Once a year meeting) the plans are 1. To rename the General Secretary the National President, a post newly filled by Peter Barton. (The makeup of the 1998-1999 Exec. Cttee. is more or less the same old names). 2. "... rekindle use of both Headquarters and Tekels Park and ... start with a pilot scheme of four subsidised weekends at Tekels Park to which two members from every Lodge or Centre would be invited for training [?? - Alan] and discussion." 3. "... of 40 National Councillors, only 21 attended and 5 sent apologies. National Council is the nucleus of the TS in England. Where are the other 16 National Councillors? Do they not care what happens? Enthusiasm must be rekindled step by step. Someone suggested as 'Think Tank' meeting in London." Quoted items are from the Southern Federation Regional Journal "Shared Wisdom" Issue 30, July/December 1998. This used to be issued quarterly, but I suspect that like the TS in England as a whole, the drop in membership numbers has been followed by a drop in resources. "Official" publications (Such as the Adyar *Theosophist* will always put a pretty gloss on things. I would have though everyone was wise to this by now! > >I wanted to give everyone a heads-up on this. > >seemed contrary to facts we've seen in the past. I am sure it is. Perhaps the 'Think Tank' has thunk ... but if there had been a major shift in UK thinking and activity, I am sure I would have heard of it by now. Peter Barton is an OK guy, and a good speaker, but so far as I know they had to move him from Scotland into England (or make a special dispensation) before he could be elected to the top job here, otherwise he would have stood in 1997. There just aren't enough people of sufficient calibre still *within* the UK TS to take the job. > Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:13:31 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Use of animals in vaccine production Some of us who are animal lovers would be glad to know that research is in a fairly advanced stage where they are able to produce vaccines using plants rather than animals. The most promising one is to use bananas and one of these days they expect all vaccines to be mass produced using plants. mkr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:21:13 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Music Distribution using Internet Distribution of music by artists are expected to take off. Traditionally there are record companies, agents and other intermediaries in this process and in the end a cd or tape costs several dollars and the artist make a small amount on each sale. In addition there are the filtering process that goes on due to the record companies. Now distribution via Internet is going to take off. Already some artists are allowing downloads of their albums for $0.99 each and there seems to be a great demand. Artists no longer have to wait and pay all the intermediaries and still make the same amount of money inthe end. Authors and artists directly reaching the end users without the interference of the middlemen/women is the trend of the future. By law of analogy, can it be that the intermediaries many no longer be needed between the Master and Chela in next millenium? mkr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 00:34:19 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Music Distribution using Internet In a message dated 98-12-14 00:22:42 EST, you write: << Authors and artists directly reaching the end users without the interference of the middlemen/women is the trend of the future. >> True, for the first time in ages, self-publishing is profitable. Chuck the Heretic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 23:42:17 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Music Distribution using Internet Apart from authors and artists making a living, the censoring and filtering done by the editors and publishers and record companies for whatever reason, is done away with for the good. So the authors and artists are able to have uncensored/unedited and unfilters communication with customers. I thing this aspect is of great value for everyone. mkr ===================== At 12:34 AM 12/14/1998 EST, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 98-12-14 00:22:42 EST, you write: > ><< Authors and artists directly reaching the end users without the > interference of the middlemen/women is the trend of the future. > >> > >True, for the first time in ages, self-publishing is profitable. > >Chuck the Heretic > >--- >You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: RAMADOSS@EDEN.COM >List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-theos-l-530Y@list.vnet.net > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 01:32:22 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 13, 1998 Dallas wrote: >"God" is given three "attributes:" omniscience, omnipresence and >omnipotence. Yes, but "God" is also given the attributes of Love and Forgiveness - enabling "God" to 'forget' and change a person or event immediately regardless of past circumstances (I'm not saying I agree with this view, but it is a very common belief among most people). Yet, karma does not - karma appears to keep some kind of list, like Santa, of who is good and who is bad. Karma does not "forgive" and in order to be "just" and "fair" (as karma is purported to be) it must be able to "forgive" and "forget." Can a judge be fair without compassion? Must all lawbreakers go to jail? But if karma does take "differences" in acts and thoughts into account - just what IS IT in karma that is doing this? Does karma have a discriminating consciousness? How can karma (action) decide just what will be appropriate for an individual? And if it is the individual who ultimately (as it has been said) decides what role they will take in life, why the need for karma? Can't God and all other entities do it between themselves? Karma just seems like a "middleman" - to me, it just doesn't seem to justify its own "existence." Why does God need such a thing as "Universal Law?" Can't God just simply BE "Universal Law?" I must say: I personally postulate that the concept of karma is merely a tool to use - like heaven and hell - in order to keep people in line. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 05:16:21 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 13, 1998 Dec 14th 1998 Dear "Johnny": Enjoyed going through your thoughts on Karma. I can see where it is a lot to grasp at one sitting. I am keeping it for re-reading. Now why not try a similar work on the "Three Fundamentals" [ SD I pp. 14-19 ]. Actually it is 1/3rd done as Karma is the 2nd Fundamental: Law. Where does everything come from ? Why is it here, and what is our purpose? Where are awe all going ? May I ask what is the address of the Site where essays/articles on KARMA are made available ? Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 07:55:21 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: "The Sundering of the ONE" Dec 14th 1998 Dear Paul: In HPB's article: THE ORIGIN OF EVIL [ ULT 3 Vol. Edn. Of HPB ARTICLES, Vol. 1, p. 132 top, LUCIFER, OCT. 1887 ] There can be found the following: "The Universe and all on it appeared in consequence of the "breaking asunder of UNITY into 'Plurality.'" On p. 124 at the beginning of the article: "HOMOGENEITY having transformed itself into Heterogeneity, contrasts have naturally been created; hence sprang what we call Evil, which thenceforth reigned supreme in this "Vale of Tears." But somewhere I recall the phrase: "The sundering of the One." And I am looking for it. Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 08:18:23 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Music Distribution using Internet In a message dated 98-12-14 00:43:42 EST, you write: << Apart from authors and artists making a living, the censoring and filtering done by the editors and publishers and record companies for whatever reason, is done away with for the good. So the authors and artists are able to have uncensored/unedited and unfilters communication with customers. I thing this aspect is of great value for everyone. mkr >> Especially for those of us who work in very controversial fringe areas, where publishers get nervous about the ideas we present. The internet has become everyman's printing press and an uncontrollable one at that. The world is going to be a much different place because of it. Chuck the Heretic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 09:44:03 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Tillet's Book Tillett started his research on CWL as part of his Doctorate Thesis which also resulted in his publishing the book "The Elder Brother". Has anyone read his Thesis? Does it have more detailed information than contained in the book? Also does anyone have Tillett's e-mail address? If so please send me privately to ramadoss@eden.com. BTW, I recall seeing his e-mail address in one of the web pages some months ago. ...mkr ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:11:08 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 13, 1998 kymsmith@micron.net writes >Karma just seems like a "middleman" - to me, it just doesn't seem to >justify its own "existence." Why does God need such a thing as "Universal >Law?" Can't God just simply BE "Universal Law?" Go to the top of the class. God IS "Universal Law" and "karma" is generated and paid for in the universal moment. > >I must say: I personally postulate that the concept of karma is merely a >tool to use - like heaven and hell - in order to keep people in line. It certainly *is* used this way - I expect you have noticed the vast range of things that are due to "bad karma". Don't hear much about "god karma" do we? One interpretation of karma not usually thought of is that "karma" = "getting even" ...... save the ":Lords of Karma" a lot of work, eh? Alan :0) --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 23:03:37 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Masters Anonymous M K Ramadoss writes >Authors and artists directly reaching the end users without the >interference of the middlemen/women is the trend of the future. > >By law of analogy, can it be that the intermediaries many no longer be >needed between the Master and Chela in next millenium? There is no such need now, nor has there ever been for those who seek truth strongly enough - which is how "intermediaries" came into existence in the first place. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 00:14:50 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 12, 1998 Christine wrote: >Shades of the House impeachment hearings!!! Anybody see those and know what I >mean? I've been sick this whole week, so have had the opportunity (if one can >call it that) to watch pretty much the entire blessed thing. Amazing stuff. I, too, have watched the whole thing - when I'm not home I record the hearings and then watch them. I've had little sleep lately! I am outraged at what the Republicans (and a few Democrats) are doing to President Clinton and our country. Disgusting - and the hypocrisy is almost too much to bear. People are dying due to lack of health care and they do not care. People are waiting for the adjustments to the welfare reform act that the Republicans promised Clinton they would work on but that is not important enough. And on and on and on. I thought years ago that some Republicans were going to arrange for Clinton to be assassinated, but the Republicans lucked out. Linda Tripp came along. Either way, Clinton has to pay way too high a price for simply giving a damn about the quality of life of the poor, gay and lesbian people, minorities, women, and children. What I especially adore is how some Republicans are using the sexual harrassment law to pin Clinton - although Clinton in no way sexually harrassed Monica, the Republicans are going to throw a bit of legislation in his face that they have fought against for years. That will teach you. . .. Oddly, the Republicans did rally around Clarence Thomas. Go figure. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 07:29:17 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 12, 1998 Dec 13th Dear Kym: Karma operates on all things and beings from the minutest >conceivable atom up to "Brahma." Proceeding in the three worlds >of men, gods, and the elemental beings, no spot in the manifested >universe is exempt from its sway. If this is so, then there is no need for God - as karma is boss in our manifested universe. Actually it is W. Q. Judge who wrote that and I copied. "God" is given three "attributes:" omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence. Knows everything, is present everywhere, and is all powerful. So Theosophically, Karma - an idea of Universal Law - is the self-perpetuating basis for all existence, whether such "being" is an atom, a human, or a Universe. Logically, the only concept, that would answer to those three would be a universal and impersonal Law -- fair, just, impartial and ever-active. And that probably the idea behind the word "God" is exactly that kind of situation. How else can we account for ourselves - I mean as independent and free-willed entities encased in an environment that provides them/us with their/our life and being, nurtures and guides them through a totally unlimited panorama of opportunities. Looking backwards, we can say (I think) that we have made our "present conditions," (also, taking reincarnation and the karma of past lives that is held over to this one into account) and we have the free-will (here and now) to change our way of living and thinking if we wish to. In fact we do this all the time and are not always aware of it. Of course there are some things we cannot change, like our birth, family, nation, and all the "past" choices we have made. But, as you see from those "aphorisms" the Mr. Judge wrote, the choice to make changes (in this view of "Karma") is always ours. We are all "Gods" in our innermost being where the Universal Spirit is. We are a part of IT. We use our creative will to make all the changes we decide on. And that is the basis that I have found to be so illuminating and comforting - and also it urges me/us to take all the opportunities we have to inquire and try to unpuzzle the riddle of our being here. And, where shall we be going from here ? Best wishes, Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 9:48:29 From: "johnny atman" Subject: Karma This effort is the outcome of a talk given to the Theosophical Society Brisbane Lodge, in which I couldn't cover the whole topic the way it was meant. Partly because of the interruptions that occurred because of the nature of personal opinion within the audience, partly because in my attempt to introduce people to something new, I seemingly lost them from the beginning. There was a lot of disappointment because I didn't quote from the books that people would normally read, and so I didn't live up to people's expectations. People are afraid to look at something without prior knowledge of the subject, without some kind of 'I know what you are talking about' smile. And according to what they already know, they agree or disagree with the speaker. That seems to be the way in which people are trying to seek the Truth (at least some of them). This time, my approach is dual. I will quote for those who like to be using references, and I will also speak freely to those who don't care about Gurus and Masters, but seek to be a Light unto themselves. Introduction. Many people go through life seemingly happy, although the state of humanity proves otherwise. The pursuit of happiness, as described by Thomas Jefferson in his speech at the launch of the American Constitution seems to be a universal theme. How people pursue happiness, what they perceive happiness to be, is an individual rather than a collective thing. Yet, beyond the everyday choirs, achievements and pursuits, there seems to be something missing, something deep and soothing, something that some humans have detected as being present yet illusive. Those striving for it often meet with disappointment or sadly, meet with mental disorders of various kinds. Some, after many years of effort, give it up completely, and find pleasure in some pursuits of material kind. A few, if any, get to a state where the the secret is revealed. They talk of a 'timelessness', of a state where duality disappears, where perception is clear, no longer manufactured and distorted. How do they do it? What is so special about those people? The questions of 'how' never seem to cease, day or night. Various sects and groups have devised methods as to achieve the 'desired' state, and the followers flock to the Gurus, the teachers. Between danger and madness, hangs the human attempt to get a glimpse of Freedom, Liberation, Enlightenment. Countless books have been written, and with the answer at hand, some people become disciples of knowledge, arguing between themselves as to what is Truth, Reality and the like. Opinion is the cheapest commodity on the market, as one observer said. People group into camps on grounds of common knowledge, and delight among themselves at what the books and their content have to offer. Sharing their experiences and upholding each others beliefs, they strengthen the power of the written word beyond imagination. Their defense of the knowledge they have acquired is frightening, if anything. More books follow, quoting those previously written and the web of knowledge thickens as time goes on. But people have to realize that the book is not the source, the source is yet to be discovered, the book may contain 'hints', at times may be more confusing than enlightening. The book is not the Truth, far from it! Some impediments to questioning. Before any attempt is made at questioning anything, we have to be clear about what are we doing. Where are we starting from. What is it that we want to achieve, if anything. Is it achievable? Are we looking for ourselves, or merely following somebody's opinion? And the bottom question is: How would I know if I have achieved that which is True, when I have never experienced it before? How am I going to recognize it, to say 'this is it'? Are the means the same as the end, or different? One has to be clear that the means and the end are one, that violence never begets peace, that resentments never begets forgiveness, that greed never begets contentment. So the other fundamental question is: by what means are we going to approach this exercise? Another thing that people have to come to terms with is that Truth is not containable. Not a book or a million books can express it, contain it or describe it. To do so, it would mean to limit the Truth, to make it into something like a commodity, to be sold, inherited and passed on. Anything that has a beginning, has to have an end. To bring Truth in the concrete world is a fallacy. To own it, is madness. To speak of it is futile. Yet, it can be experienced, so we are told. Do we have to believe that, or can we find that out by ourselves? And again, how is it that we may get to it? How do we know where to start and which direction to take? The mind is very quick to explain, rationalize anything. We ask a question, and we seem to find an answer at any costs. But are the question and the answer addressing the Truth, or are they merely for entertainment? What sort of a question can we formulate, in order to get to the Truth? Where is the question born? What is the ground from which the question arises? Is it fear? Is it greed? Is it anxiety? Is it pain? Suffering? Sadness? Boredom? Whatever is born of the ground, goes back into the ground, forming a closed circle. The circle being closed, is self-serving. The perfect definition of selfishness. The means is the end. What is the ground? Can we define what we are looking for? Is Truth definable? If we can define it, what is the ground from where the definition is born? Knowledge? Experience? Expectation? On what basis do we define the Truth? What is the means of definition? What does it mean to define, to identify, to give birth to an identity? On what grounds do we identify? According to whom is the identity given? What is involved in the process of objectification, identity formation? Can we measure the Truth? According to a source in Theosophy, Maya means 'to measure out'. Interesting? The question of meaning. When we question something, we normally ask: What does 'this' mean? What is it? Well, let's look at the word 'meaning'. The Oxford Dictionary says: 'from Latin, medianus, medius, middle, at the middle point, lying between, at neither extreme, that by which something is brought about (understanding?). Another explanation is 'to have in mind, to intend, that which is intended (to convey), the thought that a word raises in the mind. Is meaning constructed, or does it have to be discovered? Can the book convey the 'meaning' of something, or do we have to seek the meaning by ourselves? If the meaning is that which is 'lying between', what is it? Is meaning nothing other than relationship? How do I relate to something? What is the means of relationship? (Between people, people and objects?). Is the means greed, self interest, fear, violence? What is that which connects me with something else? If we look seriously, we can find out that we construct meaning, construct our relationship with things by identification. We identify something, name it and the very act of identification brings with it the meaning, the relationship with that thing. If we describe someone as an 'enemy', then the relationship is defined, we 'know' how to deal with an enemy. Expectation arises out of the act. We expect the 'enemy' to do something terrible, we prepare to defend ourselves, we avoid the person, etc. Thus, the actions we undertake towards that person are 'predetermined', and keep this in mind, it has a lot to do wit Karma. If we, on the contrary, identify somebody as a 'friend', the meaning of the word is somebody helpful, friendly, smiling, and we expect good things from the person. Our actions are predetermined, in a positive way. Desire is thus born. Desire to attract the good and keep the bad at bay. In both cases, there is no freedom to act. Keep this in mind also. Not for long, though. Is good to have an opinion for the moment (is it?), but is not advisable to wake up with it tomorrow. To define is to confine, to predetermine, to know in advance. This is clear. The relationship is concrete, set, immutable (or hard to change). The act of defining, of identity formation, implies to objectify, to concretize, to divide. The knower and the known. The known is born of the knower, thus the knower is the known, the seer is the seen, beauty is in the eye of the beholder (not in the world of form, I am obviously the fence I am looking at). But in terms of identification, the identifier is the identified, that is, in terms of perception, the perceiver is the perceived. "I am Alfa and Omega, that which is, was and is to come", the beginning and the end, the cause and the effect. Yet, few of us are aware of this simple fact. The Theosophical Masters, in one of their letters, state that "duality is not real, it doesn't in fact exist". It is perhaps correct (?) to substitute duality with 'togetherness'. The two, are the basis of conflict, one is trying to modify the other, to control, to subdue, etc. Effort that is in vain. Is just like trying to change the person in the mirror, but that person is me, only I refuse to change, I insist that the person in the mirror should change! Out of this duality, the cause-effect state, the questions of freedom arise! The question of Enlightenment! And in fact, Blavatsky mentions that Karma has something to do with the pineal gland, something that she doesn't say anymore about. I say, (?) that the action of objectification closes the gland, and maintains duality. When objectifying stops, the gland will open, the pituitary will open and the Reality restored. But don't take it as proof, it is only words! Find out for yourselves! From the Known to the Unknown. Somebody once said: "In order to get far, we must start near." That means, we must start with what we know. Where we are. What do we in fact, know? What is knowledge? Who am I? What is the process of knowing? How do we know something? In terms of what do we know? What is the basis for knowing? What is the ground of knowing? Well, the answer is obvious, it is knowledge. Knowledge is the source of knowing. Now, the question is, if the means of knowing is knowledge (as it follows, the means is the end, which is the source ) the answer will also be more knowledge. It is a self--serving mechanism, in which opinion is born, and an act of selfishness is born, knowledge sees only itself, its products, its means and ends. From knowledge only further knowledge is born. Knowledge begets knowledge. Self-opinion is blindness. Narrow-mindedness. Illusion (it is a fact, but not true, not real). What is the source of knowledge (if we are looking for the source of things)? Where does knowledge come from? Experience! Past. Memory. Remember that what is born is subject to death! Now, if I ask myself the question "who am I", how would I answer that? Try it! See what happens. Now, we must ask: Is the Truth to be found in knowledge? Obviously, we saw that in knowledge we can only find knowledge. Does knowledge contain the Truth? Obviously not, we discussed it before, Truth cannot be contained, it is not a thing, but in our nescience, we concretize it, we bring it from the Unknown to the Known, and we transform it from 'what it is' to what we think it is. Thought is the mechanism of using knowledge. thought works in duality, by comparison and measurement. Thus, we lose it and remain with a bitter taste in our 'mouth'. With an impression, an opinion. the more we try to bring it down to the concrete world of thought, the more we fail miserably, we feel like we are at the 'gate' but cannot enter. Funny that the gate comes in, there is a story about a monk who did, according to his opinion, all the good things he had to in order to go to 'heaven'. At the gate, he knocked three times, and a voice spoke: 'Who are you'? The monk said he is such and such, he did all those things he had to do righteously and he deserves a place in 'heaven'. The gate did not open. He remained there for a while, and after sometime, knocked again. The voice repeated the question and this time he only gave his name. The gate remained closed. He remained for some time puzzled, and after deep introspection, knocked for the third time. 'Who is it'? the voice enquired. This time, he remained silent. 'You may come in', the voice replied. If the source of Truth is not in knowledge, we must progress. Where is it? If knowledge or knowing is not the tool of inquiry, what then? We normally expect another tool, another method. But wait! What happens when we realize that knowledge cannot offer us the means to Truth? What happens to the seeking activity that seeks? What happens when we can see that the question arises from knowledge? That what arises from knowledge can only be answered in terms of knowledge? That we want to know? That knowing implies concrete, limited looking? That knowing implies knowledge, the known, I? We find that knowledge cannot go beyond itself! It is limited to itself! Forever its own prisoner, self-contained! What is born from the ground must go back into the ground! I once said to a group: 'The object of consciousness is the limit of consciousness'. Beyond knowledge, there is death! Death of the known, the world of the Unknown! Not nothingness, chaos and terror, but simply that knowledge has no place there, it cannot set foot in the Unknown. The Unknown is the Unborn, the Deathless! But knowledge, in it's deceptive way, tries to set a foothold in there as well, and traps are easily set to the ones who are blind! The sensorial mind has no place in the Unknown! It cannot experience the unknown in terms of sensation, yet the unknown can be experienced! Where do we go wrong? If we witness something, we want to retain some of the event. Why? What is the use of retention? How does it happen? How do we retain it? The brain, is a chemical compound, its function is to a certain extent known to psychologists, the neurotransmitters being the messengers from one part to another. Sensation is a physical thing. But why bring out something, down to the sensorial level? How do we do it? By creating an image of it! The sensorial mind works at the concrete level. The level of form, dimension, time. Experience is measured in time, how long it lasts! Experience being sensorial, can only last for a while. When we objectify something, we liken it to previous experiences, to sensations, and we lose the 'real' by the very act of objectifying. We distance ourselves from the Real, the distance between us and the Real being created by the 'meaning' of the real. Basically, when we put a meaning to something, we actually lose the Real altogether. We are inside experience, sensorial and knowledge. But the Real is beyond the sensorial. We are left with a sensorial impression of what occurred. The sensorial imprint becomes pleasure, the lack of the sensorial is pain (psychological). The pleasure then has to be repeated, because it fades, the physical glands (endorphins) can only last for a while. Where the Real, Beauty and Happiness, does not have to be repeated, it is here free, but cannot be possessed! Cannot be stored, captured, contained. It is non-material, where the brain and the senses are material. When the fact of the useless attempt to know the Truth is realized, something happens to the senses. They are freed from craving, from desire! The sensorial mind, the 'I' is gone! The need for experiencing in terms of the known is gone! So is the attachment to the concrete world! A new world opens, beyond description! There is no describer, in what terms should one describe it, when the tool of description is gone? It is there! And there is no attempt to 'know' it, because there is no desire to know it! It is not objective, nor subjective. It is always aplenty, but fathomless, measureless, timeless! It cannot be likened to anything, because in the very process, we are back in knowledge. It is causeless, but the mind, which only works in cause-effect dimension, looks for a cause to it. It wants to get to the cause, take over and anytime it needs a shot of 'reality', it simply goes to the cause and gets one! How deceptive! How often do we say:'You make me angry, you make me happy, I love you, etc.' We objectify the cause, when the cause is us, me, I. We are the cause and the effect, I am the anger and the angry. I made myself that, in my ignorance of events. If we would not divide the feeling, we would not distance from the feeling, something extraordinary would happen. But we don't. The 'you' does not exist as a thing in perception, it is only a physical organism. The 'you', if it exists, it is not real, it is born of 'I', of knowledge, but look at the things we do to each other, if we would only know that we do them to ourselves! We are one! Yet, anything wrong in us is projected onto the 'you', and the conflict starts! We even talk on behalf of 'you' in groups, that way we are exempt from criticism! If only we could see that 'I' only talks on behalf of itself, in its self-opinionated way! Many times we experience something, but we feel we cannot touch it! We cannot touch the beauty of a sunset, yet in order to find the source of beauty, we think that if we attribute it to an object, a place, something tangible, we can re-experience beauty by getting in touch with the 'object of beauty', happiness. That may be a person, a place, a song, anything sensorial and tangible. The beauty is not in the sunset, in the person, in the object. Beauty simply is! No cause! But the sensorial mind, used to the tangible world, wants to be able to touch it! To find a cause for it! And in deception, it does! It transforms beauty in pleasure, the formless into form, the freedom into desire and craving! But when the sensorial mind re-experiences the object, it is pleasure that it re-experiences! And sensation is short-lasting, hence craving is unsatiable. Time comes into being, the measure of sensorial experience, its beginning, end and greed for more! Sensation, being a material process, it is time-bound. Matter, form that is, is bound to change, beginning and end. Yet, being attached to the concrete world in order to feed our sensorial craving for experience, we are falling into what? Into Karma? Cycle of death and birth? Bound to the world of time, pleasure and pain, duality, and all that? Just because we are blind not to see what is happening, what we are doing, enslaving ourselves for the sake of pleasure, craving, when a world of beauty and freedom is at hand? Are we so blind that we don't see what greed and craving does to the world in which we live in? How trivial we are in seeking pleasure when beauty and freedom is boundless? Karma. What is it? For the bookworms, there is a Theosophical Page that deals with Karma, and it contains about 22 articles in-depth on karma, authored by people like Blavatsky and dePurucker (to name just a few). For those who like to be secure and have a source of reference, I quote from Mme. Blavatsky : "The one Life is closely related to the One Law which governs the World of Being-Karma. Exoterically, this is simply and literally 'action', or rather an 'effect-producing cause' (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 1. p.634). She goes on saying: "This state (Karmic) will last till man's spiritual intuitions are fully opened, which will not happen before we fairly cast off our thick coates of matter; until we begin acting from within, instead of ever following impulses from without; namely those produced by our physical senses and gross selfish body" (p.644). "Karma creates nothing, nor does it design. It is man who plants and creates causes, and karmic law adjust the effects, which adjustment is not an act, but universal harmony, tending ever to resume it's original position, like a bough, which, when bent down, too forcibly, rebounds with corresponding vigor" (Karma Lore 1, p.20). Karma is taken to be as cause and effect. But is the cause different from the effect? The Bhuddhist Teachings say that whoever can see the cause and effect simultaneously, he (she) can transcend Karma, being free of it. What we do, we do unto ourselves, but we don't see that. We sow fear and expect love. We are truly ignorant of facts, we would rather take refuge in a book, in a belief, in something that comforts us. What of karma? If one stayed awake through this page, one would need not ask anymore. We don't see that we hate, we see only the person we hate, and we come up with a good reason why. We don't see the act for the object. We attribute our own defects to those around us, and don't see the destruction we do to our psyche by allowing hate, greed, fear to reside in our selves. And we always find a good reason to do so, by finding an objective excuse to maintain the status quo. And the madness goes on.... I didn't seek to disappoint the ones who like quotations from books, their books are still available..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 11:04:48 EST From: ZZZLEEPER@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 12, 1998 So, Christine, What's your take on the whole blessed thing? Julien From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 00:58:03 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 09, 1998 In a message dated 12/10/98 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, Kym writes: << How can I "put things right" if I do not know what I have wronged? >> Shades of the House impeachment hearings!!! Anybody see those and know what I mean? I've been sick this whole week, so have had the opportunity (if one can call it that) to watch pretty much the entire blessed thing. Amazing stuff. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:00:28 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 09, 1998 In a message dated 12/10/98 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << There are people on this list who have uncovered past lives (Alan comes to mind) - he is far more knowledgeable in this area than I am. Maybe he will discuss the emotions he felt when he learned of his past lives. (hint, hint) >> Would love to hear about this some time. I remain skeptical about reincarnation, but I'm open to listening and thinking and learning about it. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:02:56 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 09, 1998 In a message dated 12/10/98 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << I conclude, tentatively, that we are *all connected* outside of space and time, and have good reason to suspect that any of us *could* remember anything that ever was, or is, or shall be. >> I just read this after I posted my note expressing interest in Alan's experiences. That's really interesting - I've had a similar feeling, but on a vague level. Can you say whether/if this has any relation to Carl Jung's idea of archetypes? Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:04:41 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 09, 1998 In a message dated 12/10/98 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << Being a Jesus person, he suggests to his followers that they *remember* Jesus' being on the cross, and then - wait for it - ask him what he is doing there, how he got there, and why! And he means for real .... >> This reminds me very much of guided imagery exercises. And here I thought they were something modern! Obviously their roots go back further than I thought. I suppose contemplation exercises are closely related. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:06:54 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 11, 1998 Dallas via Judge offered: >Karma operates on all things and beings from the minutest >conceivable atom up to "Brahma." Proceeding in the three worlds >of men, gods, and the elemental beings, no spot in the manifested >universe is exempt from its sway. If this is so, then there is no need for God - as karma is boss in our manifested universe. And I thought Nietzsche was way off base, but it seems he may have been right: "It is by invisible hands that we are bent and tortured worst." Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 09:54:22 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 10, 1998 == ON KARMA -- The Universal Law Dec 12th 1998 Regarding Karma-its return to us. << Karma is the adjustment of effects flowing from causes, during which the being upon whom and through whom that adjustment is effected experiences pain or pleasure. I do not think one can call it a closed loop. It is open ended. In other words when we find ourselves in a condition or circumstance our response to it either extinguishes, mitigates, or adds to the Karma that we will encounter in the future. As I see it, we are always involved in Karma and it is not compartmentalized except for purposes of understanding or analysis. And such limits are always arbitrary and artificial. Karma is a continuous flow, one set of causes involving another set, and so on and on until we learn how to perform "necessary actions" which leave no trace of selfishness attached to them. I think that it is the trace of self-interest that causes Karma to act to try to educate us into seeing that we have to be selfless and altruistic in all we do as we live. I think that is why we are invited to consider the universal ethics involved in all causative actions (feelings, thoughts, deeds) - they either are harmonious with Nature's laws or they are disharmonious and chaotic. After all, we are a living and active part of Nature, and we cannot escape it easily. This is easy to say but hard to illustrate. Also it sounds like we are de-humanizing ourselves. It sounds like we are giving up our freedom of will, the freedom to decide (and take the consequences). [ Just exactly what it is that "humanizes" us ? ] The question can well arise here: are we the slaves of our environment, or are we kings and independent ? Do we pilot our own ships or are we merely drops of water in an ever-moving stream that has objectives of its own in which we, as individuals, do not figure as more than occasional and very minor nuisances ? WE are very important to ourselves - how important are we to others, and all the rest ? If Nature is of the opinion that we are essential - hence, we exist -- then why are we given the independence to make errors ? What are "errors ?" Why are we supposed to be aware of "Nature's Laws (Karma) ?" The Universe is composed of far more beings with varying degrees of intelligence than we can presently enumerate. Broadly there are those who have advanced further than we have, there are our contemporaries, and there are those who are behind us in the great program of education that "Evolution" or "Manifestation" represents (to me). The "Whole" is composed of the interactions and interblending of these three broad categories of beings. All this is done under the Laws of Nature - which we so far have not been able to fully describe, although those that are used in the endeavors of Science have become well defined in so far as our present "matter" and its interactions physical, elector-magnetic and chemical are concerned. When we come to human interaction, psychology, sociology, and the moral laws that we sense govern society, we flounder. Why should that be so ? I wonder if the psychology of antiquity, which Theosophy advanced over 100 years ago is not meant to be a tool for us to use more wisely. For this we have to be able to separate the qualities of emotion from those of the mind. HPB in the Key to Theosophy (as also in the S D and elsewhere) gives the sevenfold nature of man perhaps for this purpose. I have found value in its study. I have found the YOGA-SUTRAS OF PATANJALI to be very helpful, a also the APHORISMS ON KARMA which Mr. Judge recorded, a portion of which I quoted earlier. Hope this is of some help Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 01:46:11 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 09, 1998 Cybercmh@aol.com writes >In a message dated 12/10/98 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan >writes: > ><< I conclude, tentatively, that we are *all connected* outside of space > and time, and have good reason to suspect that any of us *could* > remember anything that ever was, or is, or shall be. >> > >I just read this after I posted my note expressing interest in Alan's >experiences. That's really interesting - I've had a similar feeling, but on a >vague level. Can you say whether/if this has any relation to Carl Jung's idea >of archetypes? >Christine > I don't think it is in any obvious way related. In fact, now you bring it up, my experiences in this area seem to have minimized the emphasis on Jungian Archetype ideas that I once pursued. I am more or less convinced tough that Jung's archetypes represent human representations of greater realities - they are, perhaps, the "gods" of the older pantheons. Two useful books in this area, by one of Jung's star pupils: "The Great Mother, an Analysis of the Archetype," by Erich Neumann, tr. Ralph Mannheim (Bollingen Series XLVII, Princeton University Press) and "The Origin and History of Consciousness," also by Neumann, also Bollingen, but as my copy is hiding, I can't give further details, except to say that the original Bollingen Foundation was/is based in Switzerland. Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 01:25:34 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: December 10, 1998 - karma Raymond wrote: > So, when I read from you Kym, on the physical actions of these >people to the jews etc. etc. I can't help thinking, "does this person >really understand what personal Karma really is ? or are most of >the people who speak of personal Karma, like yourself and look at >what others do in the physical, but neglect to consider the real >personal Karma of thought. (Not personal Kym, just an example) Actually, Raymond, I believe you may be referring to Christine here as she was the one who brought up the subject of the Holocaust and her distress over the injustice in the world (and I empathize as I often think and feel the same way). Maybe, though, you are talking about another reference - an answer I gave her or something? If so, I'm not quite clear on what you are saying as I believe my e-mails on this topic agree with you more than disagree. No? Yes? But as far as what you said about wondering if people understand "what personal karma really is" - well, I don't think anyone does. There actually is no proof of karma and, as I stated before, the concept doesn't make logical sense. And since all action comes from thought (but not necessarily wisdom), it follows that the karma being discussed would include thought. I do think Christine and others (including myself) have not forgotten thought. But the others, and you, can correct me if I am wrong (which is rare). > Therefore, if we are to negate our personal Karma, then we must >forget our actions, and concentrate our thoughts on higher things. If >the lower spiritually evolved individuals wish to do unto others, then >let them evolve from that point, Disagree. I cannot just let other do unto others as they so wish - regardless of their so-called "spiritually evolved" status. If I see someone who is acting out of ignorance and doing cruel deeds, I am not going to chalk it up as simply a 'learning experience' and take a hands-off stance. How are we supposed to "forget our actions?" What do you mean? > Just my thoughts, I just felt like sharing them. I do thank you all >for being here, it is interesting to see so many of you who really >care. I sit here next to my cross, waiting for the nailers. Interesting how you equate yourself with Jesus here - my grandmother (god rest her saintly soul) always did this, too. However, let me hammer away. It sounds like you are taking just the position that I find most repugnant regarding those who endorse the Theosophical theory of karma. Of course, thoughts are the root of everything - but if one's thoughts make them inactive and unresponsive to the world and the people in it, then what is the point? What good is Wisdom if it is not used ACTIVELY (meaning physically) to aid others? Also, just because one responds to your e-mail thoughts "negatively" (as you mentioned in one of your paragraphs), does not mean that the person is going to have "negative" karma to deal with. If your thoughts, or my thoughts, are wrong and a person points to the errors in the thinking, then the person is, in my opinion, thinking or acting rightly. Now, if someone were to, like, call one a "butthead," hmmm, maybe that wouldn't be so right. But again, just because someone doesn't like what someone has to say doesn't mean they are automatically heaping on "negative" karma. Geez, if that's so, there's alot of people who leave my presence with a megaton of "negative" karma to have to work off (and they call me far more scary things than "butthead"). You also wrote "If you were to respond to my email in a responsible intelligent manner or not, it would only be the reaction to the personal Karma you have already committed." Again, I must disagree. I may be responding to you in a particular way due ONLY to what you had to say. Your statement appears to negate people - it allows you to chalk them up as merely dealing with some past troubles, instead of sincerely and honestly responding to what you have to say (also, this kind of reasoning can be used AGAINST you and what you have to say!). Of course, one's personality will frame how one puts and sees things, but this does not mean that WHAT one says is not valid. And who is to say what "type" of personality is the most "responsible" and "intelligent?" There are many responsible and intelligent people who have stood up and told others to 'stick it.' And there are many polite and refined folks who are able to spew poison all over the place - regardless of how responsible and intelligent they appear. Being "responsible" or "intelligent" is no indicator of what is in one's heart and no indication of possession, or lack of, Wisdom. After all, in today's society Jesus and Buddha would be considered hobos. . .I doubt either of them could hold down a job, and Jesus. . . well. . .he had that famous temper tantrum at the temple and, thinking way back, wasn't one of HPB's fave rave words "fool?" Now, if I have completely misunderstood the points of your e-mail, please correct me. It is only right. I really am trying to be a better person, you know. . .. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 08:24:19 -0500 (EST) From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Personal Karma This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BE24DD.7A3DDEC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Raymond, Actually, I tend to agree with you up to a point. I rather like G de Purucker's idea that karma acts on each plane (physical karma, astral karma, mental karma, and so on) and can sometimes cross over in its effects (thoughts can effect the body and vice versa). To eliminate personal karma, we have to sever karmic connections through forgiveness for both self and others for events in the past and having compassionate actions=20 without desire for reward in the present.=20 But I agree that if we work on our thoughts first, our actions will naturally follow. Jerry S. >Therefore, if we are to negate our personal Karma, then we must=20 >forget our actions, and concentrate our thoughts on higher things. If=20 >the lower spiritually evolved individuals wish to do unto others, then=20 >let them evolve from that point, but for those of us who are on a=20 >quest to negate personal Karma, let us watch our thoughs in order=20 >to grow.=20 > >Just my thoughts, I just felt like sharing them. I do thank you all=20 >for being here, it is interesting to see so many of you who really=20 >care. I sit here next to my cross, waiting for the nailers. =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BE24DD.7A3DDEC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Raymond,
Actually, I tend to agree with = you up to a=20 point. I rather like
G de=20 Purucker's idea that karma acts on each plane
(physical karma, astral karma, mental karma, and so on)
and can sometimes cross over in its effects (thoughts
can effect the body and vice versa).
 
To eliminate personal karma, = we have to=20 sever karmic
connections through forgiveness for both self and = others
for events in the past and having compassionate actions
without desire for reward in the present.
 
But I agree that if we work on = our=20 thoughts first, our actions
will naturally=20 follow.
 
Jerry S.
 
 
 
>Therefore, if we are to negate our personal Karma, then we must =
>forget our actions, and concentrate our thoughts on higher = things. If=20
>the lower spiritually evolved individuals wish to do unto = others, then=20
>let them evolve from that point, but for those of us who are on = a=20
>quest to negate personal Karma, let us watch our thoughs in = order=20
>to grow.
>
>Just my thoughts, I just felt like = sharing=20 them. I do thank you all
>for being here, it is interesting to = see so=20 many of you who really
>care. I sit here next to my cross, = waiting for=20 the nailers. 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0010_01BE24DD.7A3DDEC0-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:49:12 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: November & December 1998 Issues of THE HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST The November and December 1998 issues of THE HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST, edited by Dick Slusser, are online and available at: ftp://ftp.theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9811.pdf ftp://ftp.theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9812.pdf HCT files carry the extension .PDF (Portable Document File) readable with the Adobe Acrobat reader. It is available free at: http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html. The www homepage is: http://theosophy.com/hct.html The November issue features: The Art of Magic SECRET DOCTRINE Questions & Answers Who Am I? Four States of Consciousess Hopi Mythology Emergence Evolution of Fourth Kingdom And the December issue features: Knowledge: Absolute/Relative SECRET DOCTRINE Questions & Answers Ethics: For Wimps/ Plenty Report Editor's Note Geoffrey Farthing, Letter Rules of Conduct -- Eldon Tucker ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 11:27:36 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: December 10, 1998 == ON KARMA -- The Universal Law Dec, 11th 1998 On Karma == some general statements from Theosophical sources: There is no Karma unless there is a being to make it or feel its effects. Karma is the adjustment of effects flowing from causes, during which the being upon whom and through whom that adjustment is effected experiences pain or pleasure. Karma is an undeviating and unerring tendency in the Universe to restore equilibrium and it operates incessantly. The apparent stoppage of this restorations to equilibrium is due to the necessary adjustment of disturbance at some other spot, place, or focus which is visible only to the Yogi, to the Sage, or the perfect Seer; there is therefore no stoppage, but only a hiding from view. Karma operates on all things and beings from the minutest conceivable atom up to "Brahma." Proceeding in the three worlds of men, gods, and the elemental beings, no spot in the manifested universe is exempt from its sway. Karma is not subject to time, and therefore he who knows what is the ultimate division of time in this Universe knows karma. For all other men Karma is in its essential nature unknown and unknowable. But its action may be known by calculation from cause to effect; and this calculation is possible because the effect it wrapped up in and is not succedent to the cause. The Karma of this earth is the combination of the acts and thoughts of all beings of every grade which were concerned in the preceding Manvantara or evolutionary stream from which ours flows. And as those beings include Lords of Power and Holy Men, as well as weak and wicked ones, the period of the earth's duration is greater than that of any entity or race upon it. Because the karma of this earth and its races began in a past too far back for human minds to reach, an inquiry into its beginning is useless and profitless. Karmic causes already set in motion must be allowed to sweep on until exhausted, but this permits not man to refuse to help his fellows and every sentient being. The effects [of any Karma] may be counteracted or mitigated by the thoughts and acts of oneself or of another, and then the resulting effects represent the combination and interaction of the whole number of causes involved in producing the effects. In the life of worlds, races, nations, and individuals, Karma cannot act unless there is an appropriate instrument provided for its action. And until such appropriate instrument is found, that Karma related to it remains unexpended. While a man is experiencing Karma in the instrument provided, his other unexpended karma is not exhausted through other beings or means, but is held reserved for future operation; and lapse of time during which no operation of that Karma is felt causes no deterioration in its force of change in its nature. The appropriateness of an instrument for the operation of Karma consists in the exact connection and relation of the karma with the body, mind, intellectual and psychical nature acquired for use by the Ego in any life. Every instrument used by the Ego in any life is a operating through it. Changes may occur in the instrument during one life so as to make it appropriate for a new class of karma, and this may take place in two ways: a) through intensity of thought and the power of a vow, and b) through natural alterations due to complete exhaustion of old causes. As body, and mind and soul have each a power of independent action, and one of these may exhaust, independently of the others, some Karmic causes more remote from or nearer to the time of their inception that those operating through other channels. Karma is both merciful and just. Mercy and Justice are only opposite poles of a single whole; and Mercy without Justice is not possible in the operations of Karma. That which man calls Mercy and Justice is defective, errant, and impure. Karma may be of three sorts: a) Presently operative in this life through the appropriate instruments; b) that which is being made or stored up to be exhausted in the future; c) Karma held over from past life or lives and not operating yet because inhibited by inappropriateness of the instrument in use by the Ego, or by the force of karma now operating. Three fields of operation are used in each being by karma: a) the body and circumstances; b) the mind and intellect; c) the psychic and astral planes. Measures taken by an Ego to repress tendency, eliminate defects, and to counteract by setting up different causes, will later the sway of karmic tendency and shorten its influence in accordance with the strength or weakness of the efforts expended in carrying out the measures adopted. Egos who have no connection with a portion of the globe where a cataclysm is coming on are kept without the latter's operation. >From APHORISMS ON KARMA by W. Q. Judge PATH March q893 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 07:49:27 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: November & December 1998 Issues of THE HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST The November and December 1998 issues of THE HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST, edited by Dick Slusser, are online and available at: ftp://ftp.theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9811.pdf ftp://ftp.theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9812.pdf HCT files carry the extension .PDF (Portable Document File) readable with the Adobe Acrobat reader. It is available free at: http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html. The www homepage is: http://theosophy.com/hct.html The November issue features: The Art of Magic SECRET DOCTRINE Questions & Answers Who Am I? Four States of Consciousess Hopi Mythology Emergence Evolution of Fourth Kingdom And the December issue features: Knowledge: Absolute/Relative SECRET DOCTRINE Questions & Answers Ethics: For Wimps/ Plenty Report Editor's Note Geoffrey Farthing, Letter Rules of Conduct -- Eldon Tucker From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1998 02:07:54 +1100 From: Raymond.Greenwood@vic.mondial.net.au Subject: Re: December 08, 1998 - karma Namaste' Alan, Kym and all, after reading your thoughts and feelings, I find confusion to be the order of the day, Karma has been adopted by Western Society in many guises, if I may add my small input in this area. I have listened to people blame everything from bad weather to the sad outcomes of wars, to the impersonal levels of Karma. In the absence of more insight into the ways of impersonal Karma, I like most of us, accept that this is an ordered Universe and as such, it must find its own balance. So, I would accept; as most others do, that impersonal Karma is the best explanation we can adopt in the absence of more insights into the workings of this realm. But, I fail to see where we can put our society with its attitudes on various subjects, into the same classification. I listen to so many people equate Karma to good or bad deeds, this to me reflects that these people work from a Christian attitude relating Karma to the ideas of Sinful deeds etc. I feel that this misses the subtlety of the system we call personal Karma. I hear many ideas on cause and effect, but I never see anyone address the real cause. It is noted that an action will draw a reaction, even science has found that, but we seem to be preoccupied with the action, perhaps because we are physical beings, it could explain this attitude of looking at actions. I look at this issue of personal Karma, in an Indian view, the Indian approach; as I understand it, is to realize that we are not physical beings in our true form. So if you can follow my thread of thought, it then follows that the action we refer to as the seat of Karma, is in fact the reaction to the real cause of personal Karma. The real state of our being, is a conscious mind that is eternal, so if any personal Karma were to apply, it must come from our minds. To be on this list; to me anyway, shows that we wish to understand the truth about the Mysteries of life, so if I present this proposal of my understanding on personal Karma, then you in turn think negative thoughts about my ideas, then you have just caused your own negative personal Karma that you must resolve eventually. If you were to respond to my email in a responsible intelligent manner or not, it would only be the reaction to the personal Karma you have already committed. We often find in the words of the Sages, the reference to us being products of our thoughts, (a good example is in the first line of the Dhammapada; "What we are today comes from our thoughts ......... ! ) This would then mean that the idea of "Do unto others ..... !" really has nothing to do with personal Karma. So, when I read from you Kym, on the physical actions of these people to the jews etc. etc. I can't help thinking, "does this person really understand what personal Karma really is ? or are most of the people who speak of personal Karma, like yourself and look at what others do in the physical, but neglect to consider the real personal Karma of thought. (Not personal Kym, just an example) Therefore, if we are to negate our personal Karma, then we must forget our actions, and concentrate our thoughts on higher things. If the lower spiritually evolved individuals wish to do unto others, then let them evolve from that point, but for those of us who are on a quest to negate personal Karma, let us watch our thoughs in order to grow. Just my thoughts, I just felt like sharing them. I do thank you all for being here, it is interesting to see so many of you who really care. I sit here next to my cross, waiting for the nailers. "What we are today comes from our thoughts of yesterday, & our present thoughts build our life of tomorrow: our life is the creation of our mind." Buddha (The Dhammapada) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 21:32:59 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: HPB IN TIBET and her STUDIES and familiarity with "TIBETAN BUDDHISM" Dec 10th 1998 Dear Tony: As to why there is a constant battle between chaos and order, between "white" and "Black" etc... I do not know what the original CAUSE was. In Philosophy there is ( SD ) a curious statement that this is because of the "sundering of the ONE." It does not give a quick fix, but perhaps it is a base for a lot of meditation. And what is the "Causeless-CAUSE of all Causes ?" That is another strange phrase. One thing that does is to throw us back on our own devices. What if we were not here ? But, we are here, so the question is apparently irrelevant. Since we are "here," what is our purpose ? What do we do for and with ourselves ? Who are "we" at the core of our being - assuming you may agree with me that the body, the emotions, the thoughts, etc... all change all the time. There is somewhere INSIDE ( Where else ?) a place or point of stability, which does not move. Theosophy states that this is a "ray" of the ONE UNIVERSAL SELF which, philosophically includes EVERYTHING without any exceptions. [ No extra-Kosmic God. ] In Theosophy this is named the ATMA. It has for close companion and interpreter BUDDHI (wisdom - that which is accumulated as reminiscence from many of our past lives), and 3rd there is the MIND (Manas) the thinking principle which thinks, remembers, anticipates, forgets, feels and wills. Suppose that the ONE had never divided - would all this complexity of manifestaion and evolution and all the "pain" of self-conscious existence have been avoided ? And then what ? I think there are some pretty insoluble questions-and these are only confronted with the fact of our presence, and the presence of all the rest of manifested life. Look at it another way. How does Genius arise? How is it possible for minds of greater power than our own to exist, unless there is in operation a system of learning which provides for the improvement of the mental faculty. Where do the great prophets and sages come from? They say that the are men like ourselves who have gone through the same course of education we are now proceeding with, but they did it earlier than we. They have remained as part of the benevolent assistance of Nature as our guides, inspirers and teachers. They do not hide or conceal their wisdom, but they ask us to think out our own problems and work on them - there is no other way for us to grow - we have to do it ourselves. Matter, the physical body we are all familiar with. How it exists nourishes, renews itself, and eventually dies as a coherent base for mind, etc., we have seen adequate descriptions. But those are descriptive only, they do not provide CAUSE. Nor do they explain relationships. Why, for instance do thoughts have a relationship with feelings, or emotions. How does one set about defining THOUGHT, or EMOTION ? If an "emotion" or a "craving" is the expression of a strong need (or desire), how and why does that arise ? what is its cause ? It seems to be a lack. Is that "lack" external or internal ? How is it to be satisfied? Is it valuable, necessary, permanent, or is it only a momentary impulse ? And if we were to be given all the money to acquire anything we wanted - How much would that do for us ? would we use it wisely or foolishly ? Again, each to answer for themselves. Remember the symbolic (and actual ) temptations which were laid out before Christ, and also Buddha before they became "enlightened ?" That is the kind of personal situation we encounter every day of our lives. Do we keep score ? do we pay attention to that ? Is it important ? If we think we die and are non-essed each time the body dies you get one answer. If we think we are truly immortal at our core - as the INNER MAN - the answer is different. And that, I would say, marks the difference between "white" and "black" magic. The idea that there is SPIRIT as an opposite to MATTER is a mental and logical supposition. But can it be PROVED ? And supposing that these are "opposites," then what stands in the middle, what is That which sees and understands them both, and even has the capacity of self-reflection? Is that what we would call the mind ? the thinking principle ? Is it possible that this shares in the qualities of both and therefore apprehends them ? [ Here is an example of the Thinker thinking about his thought processes - so these two are to be considered separate - the Operator, and his "tools." ] Now how is that for a beginning ? As to the applications of these ideas to the opposing forces in the world of the "white" Gelugpas and the "black" dugpas, etc - all kinds of names have been given these historically -what is it we want to know ? the difference ? If we assume that the Univese runs by Laws in such a way that the least of its components is as well protected and integrated as the "greatest," then a simple definition could be as follows: Those beings in existence who cooperate voluntarily with the Laws of Nature are deemed "builders" - and called in general the "White" (or pure ) side. Those who try to isolate themselves from everyone, in what ever degree, who are "selfish," and love to confuse and deprive others of their independence are called (in general) the "Black" (or destructive) side. Of course if we do not think that Nature (as a whole) is cooperative, and we embrace the idea that everything "out there" is a jungle and the law of "tooth vs. claw" prevails - all this thinking is useless and worthless. It does not support our preconceived notions, and we may not like reading or thinking of it. However, I think that the REAL world does not car much for how we think or feel. It runs serenely on - following its own immutable and impartial way - adjusting as usual all components to each other. If we happen to become grit in the gears, then we get smoothed out as the machinery of the Law grinds serenely on. Sounds awfully mechanistic, does it not ? But, how else would you administer such a vast array of independent immortal "sparks" each striving to become consciously immortal ? they have to be treated impartially as the children of the ONE, and given their chance to live within the TOTAL. Does this "rub out" individuality ? Not at all, it merely gives it more room to expand, to accelerate its own learning and worth. Those we see and apply this become the Buddhas and the Christs of the future - and this is, ultimately the fate of us all. Some hurry up the process and some retard it. We need only consider the way in which life is supported in ourselves-our physial selves--to realize that we are almost totally dependent on the innate and inherent intelligence resident in the many atoms, molecules, cells that make up our bodies. This is what mother Nature provides us with as a "field" for our living. And we form with those many components living bonds of active force which unite all into one. How is it that they know when to come and go, and when to assist or leave the organs and structures of the body alone ? How and who surveys and controls them ? We don't - we are tenants in our own bodies and dependent on their benevolence in regard to our being. Is this not why the Buddha and Christ spoke of being brotherly ? Well, what do you think ? Dallas From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 00:22:22 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: December 08, 1998 - karma Tony wrote: >If we could truly see our past lives it would be a far crueler fate. Most >find this life enough to cope with, without reliving the cruelties of >Atlantis for example, whether that cruelty be by you or to you. When I look back on my own life, I do not see it as a "cruel fate." Why would I think the same of my other lives? I can look back and see where I made mistakes and where I learned and where I loved and where I loathed - but looking back makes me realize just how much in THIS life I have learned. Why would I not discover the same in a previous life? But, at the same time, I do see your point. I cannot say that I could handle it if I found out I had been a Nazi or torturer or some other destructive-type person. Could I handle the guilt? Am I mature enough to see it in its whole context? No, I'm not sure I could. >It is difficult to be sure that all cruelty can be put down to ignorance. >In "The Voice of the Silence," for example: "But even ignorance is better >than Head-learning with no Soul-wisdom to illuminate and guide it." When I carefully studied this statement I saw a redundancy. Since ignorance is lack of wisdom then "no Soul-wisdom" IS ignorance - even though HPB seems to be trying to separate the two terms and concepts. I believe, with this particular statement, she has failed to make a valid point. Perhaps you could help me and explain the difference between "ignorance" and "no Soul-wisdom?" >Karma is "just" - making for a balance. To look at it the other way round, >if you did some real injustice to another, would you honestly just want to >get away with it? Wouldn't you want to set the record straight, put things >right? Yes! And this is the reason why I believe that KNOWING what one has done is necessary in order for karma to truly be of value. How can I "put things right" if I do not know what I have wronged? >On TV, for an example, sometimes parents who have had their child murdered >(e.g., tortured to death with films taken by the purpatrators of them being >tortured to death) come on to relate their experience 10 years later. Some >are so utterly tormented by their horrific ideal that even their physical >bodies look tortured too. Others react differently and have a loving outlook. >It would be unjust if there were no law of Karma, and that they would >perhaps never find peace. Well, since the parent will NEVER know the karma of the person who killed their child (if you are alluding to this?), I do not see how they will find "peace" within the concept of karma. Karma does not provide "peace" if we do NOT know that justice truly occurred - just because someone tells us it is, as Theosophy attempts to do, does not mean it is so and due to karma's elusiveness it is little comfort in situations in which you spoke about above. Doubt is ever present due to the passage of time, illogical theories, and lack of personal knowledge of karmic reasons/outcomes. >It would also seem unjust if in their next life >they were born with the knowledge of the terrible suffering of their past >life, rather than it being hidden for the time being. I find this hard to buy because I don't think I would feel a "motherly" instinct toward someone who was my child in a past life - the emotions, circumstances, and family life of my current lifetime would play a big role. If someone held up to me a picture of a child and said "Look, this was once your child in a previous lifetime and she was tortured to death" I doubt I would be wracked with "parental" pain. Of course, the thought of any child being murdered would cause me horror, but the "family" pain may be absent. When I look at pictures of my ancestors, I am not filled with great emotion even though I am in a way "linked" to them. In the testimonies of people who claim to have discovered a past life, I don't recall many of them being moved to great pain and grief over events that occurred in those times. There is some emotional reaction, of course, but I've never heard of someone actually being traumatized by learning that they or someone they loved was murdered. Often, they seem to find great relief in knowing why they have felt certain ways in their current lifetime. There are people on this list who have uncovered past lives (Alan comes to mind) - he is far more knowledgeable in this area than I am. Maybe he will discuss the emotions he felt when he learned of his past lives. (hint, hint) >You may "hope to NOT give a damn over whether someone hurt me in >this lifetime or not when I die, why should I want karma to give a damn?" >You may hope not to give a damn, but what about everybody else, relations, >family, friends, children, your dog, etc.? Can you expect them not to give >a damn? Tony, why in the world would I WANT my loved ones to give a damn? Would I rather not want them to be at "peace" and full of forgiveness? Do I want to believe that my loved ones would want others to suffer because of some injustice committed lifetimes ago to them? Of course I don't - because, to me, that means that compassion has yet to fully penetrate the hearts of my loved ones (and I include myself). No, Tony, I do not expect them to give a damn - and I hope with all my heart that both they and I do not. >Our (me and you) ignorance of Karma is part of the problem Kym. I agree, but I believe you're being far too kind to the doctrine of karma postulated by Theosophy and other belief systems. Karma itself appears to be part of the problem, too. Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 01:50:13 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: December 08, 1998 - karma kymsmith@micron.net writes >There are people on this list who have uncovered past lives (Alan comes to >mind) - he is far more knowledgeable in this area than I am. Maybe he will >discuss the emotions he felt when he learned of his past lives. (hint, hint) OK then. First I am bound to say that being as objective as possible in my research, I do not accept that my past life memories are necessarily personal to me as an individual human being (at any level). One or two may be, but I suspect that some experiences are memories of past lives of human beings who were not and never have been me in any way. The emotions I have felt, interestingly enough, are the same in any event, sometimes appearing as "my emotions," sometimes as vicarious emotions, and sometimes as my own emotions *at the actual moment* of having the memory. I conclude, tentatively, that we are *all connected* outside of space and time, and have good reason to suspect that any of us *could* remember anything that ever was, or is, or shall be. Ignatius of Loyola (upon whose methods much occult work is still based) said that there are three powers of the soul (his word, "powers") and that they are the Memory, the Understanding, and the Will. Being a Jesus person, he suggests to his followers that they *remember* Jesus' being on the cross, and then - wait for it - ask him what he is doing there, how he got there, and why! And he means for real .... I have tried this, and apart from the line where he says to Peter, "Save me an egg, I'll be back on Sunday" [bad taste joke] the replies make interesting but inconclusive food for thought. They do, though, make nonsense of modern Christian ideas about him! Over... Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:43:09 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 06, 1998 In a message dated 12/7/98 12:01:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, mkr aka doss writes: << Sure. Just read HPB saying dreaming helps developing clairvoyance. Fixing to go to sleep shortly and hoping to dream. When I see results will let everyone know. >> I have noticed that whenever I consciously start paying attention to my dreams, they release a lot more memorable and meaningful material. It's almost as though they're waiting for an opening or some permission - if you pay attention to your dreams, they will respond. It helps to keep a blank journal by your bedside. When you wake up, write down whatever pops into your head, including any dreams you remember from the night before. Pretty soon (at least for me), the dreams become more vivid, memorable, and insightful. Christine To sleep, perchance to dream.......... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 01:16:54 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: PNOHTEFTU: Code of Ethics (draft) Thank badness I never worry about such things! Uncle Chuckie ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 01:17:53 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Alan has moved. In a message dated 98-12-07 23:28:29 EST, you write: << Dear All, With the help of many on this list I have now relocated to a new home, still in the extreme tip of Cornwall, UK. >> That is good news. Chuck ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 14:34:31 GMT From: alpha@dircon.co.uk Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 07, 1998 kymsmith@micron.net writes: >Christine wrote: > >>It makes logical sense, if I look >>at it "scientifically," but it bothers me because it's so unfair! > >Actually, to me, karma doesn't make sense logically either. It is not >logical to reprimand or correct a child years after he/she has committed >the unacceptable act. Why in the world would it make sense to correct a >person lifetimes after an indiscretion? People or parents who do such a >thing would be considered cruel and unfit individuals - why does karma >escape such an accusation? Karma can't work unless a person knows just >what it IS that has caused the current good or bad time in their life. If we could truly see our past lives it would be a far crueler fate. Most find this life enough to cope with, without reliving the cruelties of Atlantis for example, whether that cruelty be by you or to you. > >It's too easy, via karma, to say "I'm so fortunate in this lifetime because >I was so good in a previous one" or "They are suffering because they were >slimeballs in their previous life." Karma reminds me of a Christian >reaction to alot of things - Christians say in regards to people - "Well, >they will meet God and be judged and either punished or rewarded. There is >nothing I can do." Karma adherents can say "Well, they will meet their >karma and be judged accordingly. There is nothing I can do." Karma is >suspiciously akin to the concepts of heaven, purgatory, and hell. If the >cause of cruelty is ignorance - which I believe it is - I cannot see how >"punishment" would be the proper recourse. It is difficult to be sure that all cruelty can be put down to ignorance. In "The Voice of the Silence," for example: "But even ignorance is better than Head-learning with no Soul-wisdom to illuminate and guide it." > >And besides, personally, I get little thrill out of knowing that someone is >going to suffer in their next lifetime no matter how base they appear to >treat others. If I hope to NOT give a damn over whether someone hurt me in >this lifetime or not when I die, why should I want karma to give a damn? Karma is "just" - making for a balance. To look at it the other way round, if you did some real injustice to another, would you honestly just want to get away with it? Wouldn't you want to set the record straight, put things right? On TV, for an example, sometimes parents who have had their child murdered (e.g., tortured to death with films taken by the purpatrators of them being tortured to death) come on to relate their experience 10 years later. Some are so utterly tormented by their horrific ideal that even their physical bodies look tortured too. Others react differently and have a loving outlook. It would be unjust if there were no law of Karma, and that they would perhaps never find peace. It would also seem unjust if in their next life they were born with the knowledge of the terrible suffering of their past life, rather than it being hidden for the time being. You may "hope to NOT give a damn over whether someone hurt me in this lifetime or not when I die, why should I want karma to give a damn?" You may hope not to give a damn, but what about everybody else, relations, family, friends, children, your dog, etc.? Can you expect them not to give a damn? Our (me and you) ignorance of Karma is part of the problem Kym. Tony ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 16:26:04 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Some quotations from Theosophical Sources Dec 7th 1998 WHAT EVOLVES ? "It is the Spiritual evolution of the inner, immortal man that forms the fundamental tenet in the Occult Sciences." SD I 634 NATURE AS A WHOLE AND MAN EVOLVE "...the "Spiritual lines" refers to the evolution of man's as well as all Nature's principles; Sixth principle [BUDDHI-Wisdom ]in Man (Buddhi, the Divine Soul) though a mere breath, in our conceptions, is still something material when compared with Divine "Spirit" (Atma) of which it the carrier or vehicle. Fohat in his capacity of DIVINE LOVE (Eros), the electric power of affinity and sympathy, is shown allegorically as trying to bring the pure Spirit, the Ray inseparable from the ONE ABSOLUTE into union with the Soul [MANAS], the two constituting in Man the MONAD, and in Nature, the fist link between the ever unconditioned and the manifested." SD I 119 [ see KAMADEVA in the THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY by HPB p, 170-1 : "Desire fist arose in It, that was the primal germ of mind... ..] AN EVOLUTIONARY WAVE and the many MONADS -- The SPIRITUAL MONAD "...the "Wave of Evolution"...stops at the door of our Globe [ D ] at its 4th cycle or Round. It is at this point that the Cosmic Monad (buddhi) will be wedded to and become the vehicle of the Atmic Ray, i.e., it (Buddhi) will awaken to an apperception of it (Atman); and thus enter on the first steps of a new septenary ladder of evolution..."As above, so below." Man is the Microcosm of the Universe...Concretion follows the lines of abstraction; corresponding to the highest must be the lowest; the material to the spiritual... ..the spiritual Monad is ONE, UNIVERSAL, BOUNDLESS and IMPARTITE, whose Rays, nevertheless, form what we, in our ignorance, call the "Individual Monads" of men...The "Mona" is the combination of the last two "principles" in man, the 6th (Buddhi) and the 7th (Atma), and...the term "human monad" applies only the dual soul (Atma-Buddhi), not to its highest spiritual vivifying Principle Atma, alone. But since the Spiritual Soul, if divorced from the latter (Atma) could have no existence, no being, it has thus been called..... The atom, as represented in the ordinary scientific hypothesis, is not a particle of something, animated by a psychic something, destined after aeons to blossom as a man. But it is a concrete manifestation of the Universal Energy which itself has not yet become individualized; a sequential manifestation of the one Universal Monas...The tendency to segregation of individual Monads is gradual, and in the higher animals comes almost to the point... As the Monads are uncompounded things...it is the spiritual essence which vivifies them in their degree of differentiation, which properly constitutes the Monad-not their degrees of differentiation, which properly constitute the Monad-not the atomic aggregation, which is only the vehicle and the substance through which thrill the lower and the higher degrees of intelligence." SD I 177-179 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 06 Dec 1998 23:52:59 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 06, 1998 Christine wrote: >It makes logical sense, if I look >at it "scientifically," but it bothers me because it's so unfair! Actually, to me, karma doesn't make sense logically either. It is not logical to reprimand or correct a child years after he/she has committed the unacceptable act. Why in the world would it make sense to correct a person lifetimes after an indiscretion? People or parents who do such a thing would be considered cruel and unfit individuals - why does karma escape such an accusation? Karma can't work unless a person knows just what it IS that has caused the current good or bad time in their life. It's too easy, via karma, to say "I'm so fortunate in this lifetime because I was so good in a previous one" or "They are suffering because they were slimeballs in their previous life." Karma reminds me of a Christian reaction to alot of things - Christians say in regards to people - "Well, they will meet God and be judged and either punished or rewarded. There is nothing I can do." Karma adherents can say "Well, they will meet their karma and be judged accordingly. There is nothing I can do." Karma is suspiciously akin to the concepts of heaven, purgatory, and hell. If the cause of cruelty is ignorance - which I believe it is - I cannot see how "punishment" would be the proper recourse. And besides, personally, I get little thrill out of knowing that someone is going to suffer in their next lifetime no matter how base they appear to treat others. If I hope to NOT give a damn over whether someone hurt me in this lifetime or not when I die, why should I want karma to give a damn? Kym ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 09:03:36 -0500 From: John E Mead Subject: why do they want 20M$ ?? it is kinda of interesting that the TSA is more concerned about the safety of the 20 M$ than theosophy itself. I have never understood why they let the pot get that big to begin with. There are alot of good projects they could do. However, since they are an Oligarchy, I can understand their obsession. Gee -- I just got an Annual Fund money-request from TSA. Do they really think I would give them more money ?? john e. m. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 09:35:52 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Self-reliance == KARMA == UNMERITED SUFFERING == DEVACHAN Dec 7th 1998 Dallas offers: I see several exchanges on these subjects, but the best that can be offered (in a short amount of space) is what HPB offers to us to consider in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY. There she deals with the question of Karma, its basis, as a universal and dynamic harmony that adjusts all MOTIVES between people and the things the use and live with. {As I see it, the important thing to remember is that all "lie-atoms" are immortals. We the Mind-stage-life-atom and the pen it use composed of far less experienced "life-atoms" are both sets of immortals that are developing in intelligence through experience at their respective levels. If I abuse my pen not only will it cease writing, but the atoms I have abused through my neglect, carelessness or anger, will carry the impress of those motives and emotions and will remain "attached" to me by magnetic ties. When in the course of karmic cycles they return to be used by me again, they will bring that impress of abuse with them, and so on. This idea can be extended to all things we use, or eat, or breathe - they are all susceptible to the impressions of emotion and thought we impress them with while we use them. This enormous responsibility is taught by Theosophy so that we realize the importance of our every moment of living. She also deals with UNMERITED SUFFERING (and unmerited prosperity) the necessity for considering that we are immortal EGOS and every incarnation is as a day to our real journey through the fields and classrooms of experience that a Manvantara provides - hence the roots of some strange "accidents" in life can only be traced (by a true seer into the Akasa) in causes we may have set up with others in past lives. Karma and reincarnation - are also called the doctrines of universal justice and of hope. Karma is the Universal Law - from which there is no escape. It is fairness to all, hence BROTHERHOOD. Reincarnation gives us the opportunity of taking steps to adjust our attitudes and to meet the results of what we set in motion in our past (in this life) as also in past lives. Devachan is a condition of the immortal Ego where it reviews the good and the altruistic, unselfish and brotherly actions, motives and thoughts of a past lives. It is intermediate between a past life and the present one. And when this Life closes it will serve as a link to our next incarnation. So theosophy teaches. But, in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY you will find many more details. Get a KEY with a good INDEX and use the Index to connect the scattered references to form a complete whole. I strongly recommend a careful reading of the KEY TO THEOSOPHY by HPB, as many of the question asked are well covered there. Best wishes, Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 10:14:56 -0500 (EST) From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Tsonkhapa & Karmamudra This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BE21C7.DC3C4B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dan, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Clear Light of Bliss: A commentary fo the Practice = of Mahamudra in Vajrayana Buddhism, Tharpa Pub., 1982 & 1992.) who is = currently out of favor of HH the Dali Lama wrote that, "To attain the isolated mind of ultimate example clear light we muct = have completed the power of our meditation on the channels, winds, and = drops. Furthermore, to attain the isolated mind of ultimate example = clear light before the clear light of death it is necessary to accept a = qualified action mudra." (p. 105) He is saying here that under normal circumstances, a physical consort is = necessary for enlightenment prior to death so that the clear light of = death will be recognized. Then he goes on to say, "The highly realized Lama Je Tsongkhapa did not accept an action = mudra because he was concerned for the welfare of his ordained = followers. Although he was at the stage where he could have meditated = with an action mudra without accumulating the slightest negativity, even = though he was a monk, he did not do so. Why not? He wished to prtect = those impatient disciples of the future who, thinking they could follow = his example without being fully qualified, would have been tempted to = take a consort prematurely and thus would have created the cause for = lower rebirth rather than for enlightenment." (pp 105-106) So according to Gyatso, Tsongkhapa did not practice with a karmamudra. = Hopefully this topic can be put to bed now. Jerry S. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BE21C7.DC3C4B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dan,
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Clear Light of = Bliss: A=20 commentary fo the Practice of Mahamudra in Vajrayana Buddhism, Tharpa = Pub., 1982=20 & 1992.) who is currently out of favor of HH the Dali Lama wrote=20 that,
"To attain the isolated = mind of=20 ultimate example clear light we muct have completed the power of our = meditation on the channels, winds, and drops. Furthermore, to attain = the=20 isolated mind of ultimate example clear light before the clear light = of=20 death it is necessary to accept a qualified action mudra." (p.=20 105)
 
He is saying here that under normal=20 circumstances, a physical consort is necessary for enlightenment prior = to death=20 so that the clear light of death will be recognized. Then he goes on to=20 say,
"The highly realized = Lama Je=20 Tsongkhapa did not accept an action mudra because he was concerned = for the=20 welfare of his ordained followers. Although he was at the stage = where he=20 could have meditated with an action mudra without accumulating the = slightest=20 negativity, even though he was a monk, he did not do so. Why not? He = wished=20 to prtect those impatient disciples of the future who, thinking they = could=20 follow his example without being fully qualified, would have been = tempted to=20 take a consort prematurely and thus would have created the cause for = lower=20 rebirth rather than for enlightenment." (pp = 105-106)
So according to Gyatso, Tsongkhapa = did not=20 practice with a karmamudra. Hopefully
this topic can = be put to bed=20 now.
 
Jerry S.
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BE21C7.DC3C4B20-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 20:17:41 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Survey - Internet Here is a survey on internet access. Nobody except some "pseudo-occultists" who love pen and paper seems to find internet almost indispensible. mkr ============================== by Mary Lisbeth D'Amico -IDG If you were stranded on a desert island and could have access to the Internet, a telephone, or a television, which would you choose? If you said TV or phone, you are in the minority among U.S. online users -- at least, according to America Online (AOL). In a poll released Thursday of 1,001 U.S. online users with Internet access from their home, 67 percent said they would choose a computer with Internet access if they were marooned on a desert island for an extended period of time. Another 23 percent chose a phone, while only 9 percent opted for television. About 87 percent of those polled said they would miss online access if it were no longer available to them, and 64 percent who have been going online from home for three years or more say they would miss online access "a lot," and that "using an online or Internet service is just about a necessity to me," the study said. Roughly three quarters of those polled said that being online has made their lives better, according to the study. Eight in 10 people said the Internet makes many activities easier and more convenient, and among those with children, half said that being online has a more positive influence on their kids than watching television. Many respondents were unwilling to quit going online while on vacation. Of those respondents that owned a laptop computer, 47 percent said they take it with them on vacation, and about 26 percent of all users said they check their e-mail on vacation. Some 94 percent of those polled said going online makes it easier to communication with family and friends, with 87 percent regularly doing so. However, differences in usage emerged according to age group. Online users over the age of 50 are more likely to use the Internet to manage and plan their finances, while those between the ages of 18 and 24 are more likely to use it to socialize, the study said. Getting a profile of the typical user, about 65 percent of the online population is over age 35. Users are more likely to have graduated from college, be married, have children under the age of 18, and to represent a higher median household income bracket than the American public at large, according to the study. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 04:12:32 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: PNOHTEFTU: Code of Ethics (draft) Dear folks, Rather intellectual, but ... > ------- Forwarded message follows ------- > > -----------------------------(+as.MS(kxo)----------------------------- > > Return-Path: > Received: from punt-21.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.6]) by nellie2.demon.co.uk > with SMTP id > for ; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:00:51 +0000 > Received: from punt-2.mail.demon.net by mailstore for guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > id 913055642:20:19991:9; Mon, 07 Dec 98 18:34:02 GMT > Received: from server1.newciv.org ([206.83.181.196]) by punt-2.mail.demon.net > id aa2019787; 7 Dec 98 18:33 GMT > Received: from eshu.request.net (eshu.request.net [207.48.132.2]) by newciv.org (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA03477 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 10:28:42 -0800 > Received: from hugin.request.net ([208.204.14.7]) by eshu.request.net with ESMTP id <16543-2705>; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:27:58 -0500 > Received: from Bad.HELO.Input ([164.67.21.61]) by hugin.request.net with SMTP id <34478174-530>; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 13:27:50 -0500 > Message-ID: <00fb01be22cf$ab49aea0$334f8e95@jccf_nt2> > From: "Maximilian J. Sandor, Ph.D." > To: > Subject: PNOHTEFTU: Code of Ethics (draft) > Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 09:23:29 -0800 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 > > it's been a while that I wrote something.. > hope you'll enjoy it... > mx > > ............................. > Code of Ethics > (draft for 'The Little Purple Notebook On How To Escape From This Universe') > http://transmillennium.net/pnohteftu/ > by Maximilian J. Sandor, Ph.D. > > Since all times humans have pondered a formulation of principles > that would warrant a harmonious and prosperous relationship with fellow > humans, animals, spirits, and Earth (Gaia) as a living, > composite entity. > > Most of these formulations in history have been expressed in the > form of commandmends, oaths, precepts, or legal prescriptions. > > There are inherent problems with expressions in these forms. > Neither sub- nor superconscious minds are processing semantical > constructs that contain logical clauses. Notably, the NOT clause will be > dropped from a sentence, making statements of the form 'Thou shalt not...' > to an instruction of the form 'Thou shalt...!" and can thus prompt composite > Beings like humans to do exactly what they shouldn't. > > The situation is further complicated by the severe drawbacks of > ethical conduct for the sake of ethical conduct itself: for a Being to > arrive at a genuine and honest flow of action, the Being itself has to > change its way of operations with the goal of 'naturally' doing the right > thing at the right time without even contemplating or having a present-time > awareness of verbalized rules. > > Thus, for a genuinely ethical person, verbalized and codified rules become > completely irrelevant as such - the person will only be acting in a way that > automatically, necessarily, and optimally aligns with its own purposes and > the purposes of all other persons that work towards harmony, balance, and > expansion. > > Until this is the case, it can be helpful to have some kind of a > checklist to assess the level of ethical alignment of one-self, others, > groups, and even abstract laws as such. > > The set of alignments presented in this 'Code of Ethics' here are > categorized by SPHERES OF INFLUENCE, by ACTION > PARADIGMS, and by FLOWS. > > SPHERES OF INFLUENCE denote the extent of the outreach > involved in a action. For example, does the action in question > concern only oneself (Sphere 0) or does it concern one's partner > (Sphere 1), and so forth. Few actions are limited to a single sphere of > influence and a 'higher' sphere encompasses all 'lower' spheres. > > ACTION PARADIGMs are classes of operations such as financial affairs, sexual > affairs, or political affairs, etc. Like the spheres of > influence, action paradigms can overlap. However, there is no clear > hierarchy like in the spheres of influence. > > FLOWS describe both the vector along which an action takes place and the > particle or the quality that is transferred during the action. > > There are IN- flows and OUT-flows. Flows are numbered here > according to their associations, similar but not identical to the > spheres of influence. Flow 0 affects only oneself, Flow 1 happens between > oneself and others, and Flow 2 happens between others. > > Here is a simple example using 'the weight of the physical body'. > > It is primarily a Sphere 0 question of the person itself. An inflow 0 would > be gaining weight and an outflow 0 would be losing gain > (giving excess body matters back to nature). If there is a problem with the > weight of the body, it will affect other spheres, like a > partnership (Sphere 1), and to a much lesser impact, the survival > chances of humankind as a species. Action modes can be 'eating' and its > complementary action, ahem, but also 'physical exercise', > etc. > > As another example, paying a sum of money to an organization is primarily a > Sphere 2 inflow-1 action embedded in the 'financial' > action paradigm as well as paradigms of that the organization is > using. It greatly affects one's own finances because it is an outflow from > Sphere 0. > > Checklist for > > an Assessment of Ethics > > Step 1: For the action in question, determine its vector, strength, and > attribute(s). > > Step 2: Assess the range and estimated impact of the action and determine > what spheres of influence are affected. > > Step 3: Estimate potential errors in perception and potential mistkes in the > situational analysis. > > Step 4: Analyze the leverage that the action in question has. To hurt > someone with a knife considers a greater determination thank pulling a > trigger or pushing a button. > > Step 5: View the action within the context of the associated action > paradigm. > > Step 6: For all affected spheres on influence check all flows: > > SPHERE 0 > > Does the action align with the priority of one's own spiritual progress and > the health and well-being of one's current body? > > What are results and effects for: > > Flow 0: in regards to oneself - what is the inflow or outflow, > (depending on the vector of the action)? > Flow 1: in regards to someone else - what is the inflow or > outflow, (depending on the vector of the action)? > Flow 2: considering the action of others to others - what is effect on > _those_ action depending on the inflow or outflow of one's _own_ action? > > [Extended Flow Consideration: consider what would have happen if > the opposite flow would be applied (inflow instead of outflow or vice > versa)?] > > SPHERE 1 > > Does it help or assist in any form other individuals? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > SPHERE 2 > > Does it align with groups similar to one's own? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > SPHERE 3 > > Does it safeguard the survival of Humanity as a whole? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > SPHERE 4 > > Does it assist and safeguard the well-being of all non-Human Beings with > current bodies that share with us this Universe and Planet Earth as a > dwelling place? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > SPHERE 5 > > Does it assume custodianship for Earth as a living, composite Being? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > SPHERE 6 > > Does it help or assist Beings without a current body who chose to share this > reality with us? > > Do a Flow Consideration like for Sphere 1 > [Do an Extended Flow Consideration] > > Step 7: Considering the matrix of the estimated impact of the action and > the matrix of available alternate choices, is the action mandated, > warranted, potentially worth the risk, unnecessary or inappropriate within > the context of current actions? > > At first glance, an assessment as the above, or any process similar to such > an assessment, is certainly not as 'easy' as "Thou shalt.." or "Thou shalt > not..". > > It provides, however, a guide for evaluation of any potential action and is > not limited to specifically mentioned acts like murder or theft. > > In a sense such a 'Code of Ethics' is therefore much more > demanding than any codified law that can be subject to semantical > distortions such as 'double-speak'. It thus provides also a better > protection agains "double-standards", for example. > > It is not completely fool-proof against abuse through over- or > undervaluations of importances of spheres. It is a common attitude of > suppressive groups, for example, to overvalue their own importance, > favoring Sphere 2 and neglecting the 'lower' Spheres. > > Very often aggressive actions are being justified by stressing Sphere 3 or > above. An inproper action is an improper action and the Being on a 'higher' > level _knows_ this very well and will punish itself in the future no matter > if the action was done for the 'sake of mankind' or in the 'name of (a) > God'. > > The Assessment of Ethics is different from advancing or handling > 'Zones of Operations' or ('Ethics) Conditions' but it can be integrated in > such strategies. > > The Extended Flow Considerations are given here to show a > complete process of improving one's overall integrity. Contemplating > opposite flows can break loose stuck flows which can be considered a prime > factor for illogical and unwanted behavior patterns. > > Using the 'Assessment' will quickly shatter any notion of the 'right or > wrong trap' and replace with a multidimensional view of a matrix of > relations that is being affected by an action. > > Its usage, over time, will disclose paradigms such as 'the end > justifies the means' as what they mostly are: justifications to hurt > someone else or to prompt others to do what oneself wouldn't want to do. > > As demonstrated in modern 'Chaos Science', small action such as the flap of > a butterfly can ultimately trigger a thunderstorm. > > No matter how 'insignificant' one's action may appear if it is seen > only within a local or broken context - its effects will certainly > reverberate throughout this Universe for times to come. > > May All Beings Be Happy, Free, And Safe !!! > > -----------------------------(+as.MS(kxo)----------------------------- > > Alan :0) > --------- > Simply Occult .......... > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 04:16:11 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 06, 1998 kymsmith@micron.net writes >If I hope to NOT give a damn over whether someone hurt me in >this lifetime or not when I die, why should I want karma to give a damn? > Dear Kym, Indeed, why should you? My own karma is such that I am destined in this life to think that the "doctrine" of karma is a grossly distorted notion................... Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 04:19:28 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Alan has moved. Dear All, With the help of many on this list I have now relocated to a new home, still in the extreme tip of Cornwall, UK. Anyone needing my new snail address please let me know privately. And a Merry Whatever-Festival-is-your-Favourite to you all! Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:09:31 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 26, 1998 In a message dated 11/27/98 12:00:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << >I am really eager to know about yours experience. I also welcome any one >else's private communication of any of their experiences. > >Hope this should clear up the matter. Dear Doss, And so it does. I will be in touch! >> Oh gosh, I feel all warm and fuzzy just reading this! (I'm being a bit flip, because it's really late, but I'm not kidding here. "Blessed are the peacemakers.") Please keep us posted on any especially good sharings if you both are so inclined. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:10:07 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 26, 1998 In a message dated 11/27/98 12:00:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << LOL! I heard than Ananda left town with her new boy friend ... >> Yep. I heard she wouldn't take any more of his CHIT. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 23:18:02 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 26, 1998 At 12:09 AM 12/6/1998 EST, you wrote: > >peacemakers.") Please keep us posted on any especially good sharings if you >both are so inclined. >Christine Sure. Just read HPB saying dreaming helps developing clairvoyance. Fixing to go to sleep shortly and hoping to dream. When I see results will let everyone know. ...mkr aka doss ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:30:27 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 27, 1998 In a message dated 11/28/98 12:01:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << I did not invent the definition of Karma, nor did Mme. Blavatsky. It is, she says (and so do the Hindu Pundits) the undeviating law that balances all causes with their effects. No exceptions. >> Could someone explain why innocents have to suffer from the bad karma set in motion by others? I never cease to be hurt by this, and it is an issue that I struggle with emotionally and spiritually. It makes logical sense, if I look at it "scientifically," but it bothers me because it's so unfair! Is life just not fair? How can we live with that reality? Not just survive, but thrive? Example: why innocent Jews were shot in the back of the head and pushed into grave pits or gassed to death during WWII, including children. Why this has happened to Bosnians more recently, or Rwandans, or the Chinese at Nanking, or slavery in the Americas. Such a massive attack of evil and degradation, over and over. Unimaginable acts - and I wonder, what drove them to commit these acts? Could I also be so driven, given the same experiences or forces at work in those cases? It seems beyond fear - it seems like a wallowing in evil. I just want to smack people who answer that "God never permits evil unless it's for a greater good." The God I believe in would not calculate in this way. But at the same time, I find this a crisis of my own faith in a way - how can an essentially good Universe permit such things? Where is the good and where is God for the victims? When people thank God or the Universe for their blessings - why weren't these other innocents so blessed also? How can I be thankful for blessings knowing that they are not bestowed on other souls at least as deserving as I, if not more so? And then I see a sunset over the ocean, or note a heroic or loving act, and I feel at those times deep down that the Universe is good at the core. I feel encouraged and inspired. Any light anyone can shed on this? and/or any good books on this topic you can recommend? (I read "When Bad Things Happen To Good People," and was totally unsatisfied with the author's conclusion, which seemed to be "God makes mistakes too.") Should I be reading Dietrich Bonhoeffer or other prisoners of war? Y'know, when I think about this late at night, it's probably my greatest spiritual thorn - and this is the first time I have put it in writing, now that I think about it. I've been so afraid even to acknowledge such a large issue that threatens to bowl me over, along with the rest of humankind. I could believe so many wonderful things if I could solve this in my mind somehow. Or is it unsolvable? is that the perennial question of humankind - why does evil exist?? How can people be so heartless and cruel toward their fellow human beings?? Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:40:55 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 29, 1998 In a message dated 11/30/98 12:01:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << Indeed this is often the case, though I have learned (took a very long time) to value the reality that is right in front of me (often a cat, but all of the creatures get in the act). >> I think that if you don't value the cat-reality, the cat-reality imposes itself in no uncertain terms and *forces* you to value it. At least, that's how my Kitty is. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:41:59 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 29, 1998 In a message dated 11/30/98 12:01:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << Like mink are killed by gassing them with carbon dioxide to make fur coats for rich people? They are bred for this. I certainly pine over such things ... I gave up eating meat for similar reasons, and I have not starved to death. >> I did the same thing many moons ago. No anorexia over here either! Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 23:18:18 -0700 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 05, 1998 Good *God*. What is it about Theosophy that seems to inspire people to use the *collective* when they are deep in the midst of entirely self-involved narcissistic ruminations about their own "spiritual growth"? 'Tis a malady I've seen afflicting several over the years on this list. "We" should do this, "we" should do that. "We" should consider the other. Ach! Such childishness. Perhaps "we" should get over ourselves, stop preaching and start talking in "our" own words. "We" don't have any more of a clue than anyone else, and if "we" can't even see the tremendous arrogance inherent in believing that what "we" happen to be interested in at the moment should be what everyone *else* thinks about also, then "we" probably aren't ready to even begin understanding a philosophy grounded in *selflessness*. Tee Hee, -JRC ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 02:39:13 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: December 05, 1998 In a message dated 98-12-06 01:19:49 EST, you write: << "We" don't have any more of a clue than anyone else, and if "we" can't even see the tremendous arrogance inherent in believing that what "we" happen to be interested in at the moment should be what everyone *else* thinks about also, then "we" probably aren't ready to even begin understanding a philosophy grounded in *selflessness*. Tee Hee, -JRC >> Diogenes! Get that lamp over here. I think we've found the world's only honest Theosophist! Chuck the Heretic ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 23:42:40 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 29, 1998 Cybercmh@aol.com writes >I think that if you don't value the cat-reality, the cat-reality imposes >itself in no uncertain terms and *forces* you to value it. At least, that's >how my Kitty is. >Christine Yep. We cats have got everyone's number ... or will have, given time ... Alan's cats, Charlie and Tiz, to be seen on website below via Changing Images link --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 00:35:48 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 27, 1998 Cybercmh@aol.com writes >In a message dated 11/28/98 12:01:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- >l@list.vnet.net writes: > ><< I did not invent the definition of Karma, nor did Mme. Blavatsky. > It is, she says (and so do the Hindu Pundits) the undeviating law > that balances all causes with their effects. No exceptions. >> > >Could someone explain why innocents have to suffer from the bad karma set in >motion by others? I never cease to be hurt by this, and it is an issue that I >struggle with emotionally and spiritually. It makes logical sense, if I look >at it "scientifically," but it bothers me because it's so unfair! Is life >just not fair? How can we live with that reality? Not just survive, but >thrive? Dear Christine, HPB and the Hindu Pundits may say this, and in its own way, so does Newtonian physics. (Apple falls on head, head hurts, apple bruised, apple maybe gets eaten for obeying natural law and demonstrating gravity). The most evil explanation of "Karma" is where it is claimed that the innocents who suffer do so because of "bad karma" for acts performed in previous lives. (There is a Jewish prayer used by Jewish males which thanks God for not making them women. The women don't get a similar prayer). It seems that life is *not* fair, for even if the whole karma bit is true, what other law determines that people set evil acts in motion in the first place? Closer to home, some kids get bullied to death, in that they kill themselves. The bullies get a kick out of seeing some poor soul suffer as a result of their desire for the pleasure that power over another person brings them. Don't "debate" this intellectually anyone - those of us who've seen it *know* that's how it is, even more so if we too have been bullied. >Example: why innocent Jews were shot in the back of the head and pushed into >grave pits or gassed to death during WWII, including children. Why this has >happened to Bosnians more recently, or Rwandans, or the Chinese at Nanking, >or >slavery in the Americas. Such a massive attack of evil and degradation, over >and over. Unimaginable acts - and I wonder, what drove them to commit these >acts? Could I also be so driven, given the same experiences or forces at work >in those cases? It seems beyond fear - it seems like a wallowing in evil. I >just want to smack people who answer that "God never permits evil unless it's >for a greater good." The God I believe in would not calculate in this way. We are asking the same question here - what causes inhumanity among humans, especially the kind you describe. No doubt some clever theosophist will try to tell you that your wanting to smack people who answer as above is the "first step" on the road to degradation. I would say it's the first step n the road to seeking justice. As for God, well, as I see it, "God" neither permits nor denies, but people do. > >But at the same time, I find this a crisis of my own faith in a way - how can >an essentially good Universe permit such things? Where is the good and where >is God for the victims? When people thank God or the Universe for their >blessings - why weren't these other innocents so blessed also? How can I be >thankful for blessings knowing that they are not bestowed on other souls at >least as deserving as I, if not more so? Jews entering the gas chambers usually knew what was going on, at least later in the war they did - word gets around. Millions of them went in chanting the *Shema* - "Hear O Israel, the Lord (y)our God is One." That was (and is) *their* faith at work, faith (trust) in (divine) Unity. [The Hebrew word we translate as "One" in this prayer is *Achad," which means "One" in the sense of Unity]. Such blessings as we have in *this* world are there for *all* people, but not all people get them, because other people don't want them to have any - the pursuit of health, wealth and happiness at others' expense. So don't thank God for blessings, curse *people* for their lack. What to do with the $20 million? Feed the hungry, house the homeless, heal the sick, etc., etc., etc. > >And then I see a sunset over the ocean, or note a heroic or loving act, and I >feel at those times deep down that the Universe is good at the core. I feel >encouraged and inspired. So do I, and living by the ocean, I get to see plenty of sunsets. Heroic and loving acts inspire me, too, but the goodness I see only in the hero(ine) or loving person. > For me (as with the putative Mahatmas in their letter ten, Barker edition) there is no place for a "personal" God, and even more so if this "God" is addressed as "He." > >Y'know, when I think about this late at night, it's probably my greatest >spiritual thorn - and this is the first time I have put it in writing, now >that I think about it. I've been so afraid even to acknowledge such a large >issue that threatens to bowl me over, along with the rest of humankind. I >could believe so many wonderful things if I could solve this in my mind >somehow. Or is it unsolvable? is that the perennial question of humankind - >why does evil exist?? How can people be so heartless and cruel toward their >fellow human beings?? Horrid, isn't it? People can be like this because this is how so many people *are.* This is the evidence, and no amount of praying or wishing makes it otherwise. On the plus side, it seems that while evil is, like beauty, something in the eye of the beholder (up to a point), the very fact that some people worry about it shows that some people *care* - and caring is the beginning of wisdom. Maybe "God" says to us, "It bothers you, huh? Then *do* something about it. Start with the $20 million, perhaps ..... Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 23:38:30 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 26, 1998 Cybercmh@aol.com writes >In a message dated 11/27/98 12:00:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- >l@list.vnet.net writes: > ><< LOL! I heard than Ananda left town with her new boy friend ... >> > >Yep. I heard she wouldn't take any more of his CHIT. >Christine Ouch! Alan --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 23:36:39 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 25, 1998 Christine writes >Good one! (I'm just now getting around to answering my e-mail, having taken >longer than most to digest the Thanksgiving meal.....) But how do I know that >I am? Oh dear, a bit of a sticky wicket. Who wants to know? [burp] Alan :-) --------- Simply Occult .......... http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://list.vnet.net/?enter=ti-l From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 05:18:18 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Kamamudra = Kundalini = Will == Motive Dec 4th 1998 Dallas offers: In several postings I notice questions flying back and forth concerning tantrika instructions and in particular those concerned with Kamamudra, Kundalini, Meditation ( and its effects) and I wonder that (what seems to me) to be the basic idea behind these considerations does not seem to ring out clear. To me it is MOTIVE. Why are these things done or investigated ? Curiosity, the search for personal power or domination ? And, if there is some knowledge attained, what then ? What does the attainment of information or of some "power" (?) confer ? If this is for the general good of humanity, Theosophy states that they unfold naturally. A study of Buddhism, Lamaism, Tantrikaism, etc... provide what as a conclusion? If "meditation" is pursued that induces physical pain it is clear that this is undesirable. Are we quite sure that what we call mediation is really so ? Why is it pursued ? Is Patanjali studied and grasped first ? If not, then there are going to be tremendous troubles. Another fact that is plain and that if the focus of attention is on some sensation, or physical result that has to do with a selfish purpose it is self-limiting. First one must grasp the general laws of Nature, and then progress may be achieved if the desire is made unselfish. Both the DHAMMAPADA (the Footfalls of the Law) by Gautama Buddha, and the VOICE OF THE SILENCE from the Book of Dzyan ought to be studied and understood - then applied. This is as I understand true progress can be made. We have to realize the essential Unity of All and cease behaving as though all beings were "different" or at "war" with each other for some individual advantage. That is not true, The Universe and our World do not run under those sole conditions. Nature is innately constructive and cooperative. The law of Brotherhood prevails, distorted though our motives and actions may be individually. I wish this could be seen my all as a basic fact: None of us would be able to live for an instant if Nature were to turn against us, and behave as we try to behave to others. Dallas ====================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 06:57:28 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: The ACTIVE CYCLE OF WORK -- Does it close ? 1997/98 to 2097/98 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 19:36:41 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: "Closing Gate" the period 1987/8 and 1997/98 now pasing on 100 years later Dec 4th 1998 Dear friend: In regard to the "closing" of a "gate in 1897/98 there was much speculation at one time. Now we are asked about the succeeding 100 year cycle which presumably end in 1997/98 this year. As this is reviewed we find: One of the best way to answer such questions is, perhaps, to look for the original references and then decide what, philosophically, we can get out of them in the way of useful and present-time application. Otherwise they remain as an inexplicable memory and a vague unease in our minds. The sun never sets, a period of rest never begins without the hope, or the certainty, that the economy of Great Nature will always bring on a renewal, a reawakening. Why should this hope or certainty exist ? Consider that Nature (the Universe, our World and Solar system) contains all, and has provided us with life up to this moment - a life in which we rejoice (or suffer) depending on our nature and character. Also, we are endowed with curiosity, and with a desire to find out how and why things are as they are. What are our powers ? What is our particular equipment ? How can we use it ? These are all common questions we ask ourselves, and one-another. In the matter of cycles we find that in a year we go through several, and some have more vitality than others on the surface. But even winter may see the secret growth and nurturing of those seeds that will form the harvest of next Autumn. So there is overt as well as secret work progressing all the time. We have to investigate and discover its methods. These changes are universal, and when day changes to night and activity to rest, or Summer becomes Winter we seek to discover the reasons for change. It is so also in the occult cycles of activity and rest. But whether one or the other is presently active, work proceeds. And when this happens the work will still go one. Even during that which is night to some, there is activity elsewhere. It is a ceaseless urge to grow, to experience, to learn. The move to progress which is innate in each one of us, as in all the rest of nature-even to the tiniest atom continues. It is the beating of the great secret Heart, symbolized in antiquity by the Central Spiritual SUN - it is an intimation of this Sun of Life, reflected in our hearts that we note as the innate, persistent sense of individual immortality - one that leaves its insistent mark everywhere. In her article THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS ["Lucifer," Nov., Dec. 1887, Feb 1888 ] HPB gives (in a footnote) [ ULT 3 Vol. Edn. Of HPB's Articles, Vol. 3, p. 169 fn ] at the outset an important date relating to occult cycles and the ending of the "Age of Pisces - and the starting of that of Aquarius - a cycle of 2,155 years - not long, but very occult as the influence of sun and zodiac changes in a subtle but definite way (details not all given). HPB predicts that psychologists will thereafter have extra work to do as the psychic idiosyncrasies of humanity will enter on a great change. [ And that means this present - and she also refers to this in her FOURTH MESSAGE TO THE AMERICAN SECTION IN CONVENTION IN 1891: "The period which we have now reached in the cycle that will close between 1897/98 is, and will continue to be one of great conflict and continued strain. If the T.S. can hold through it, good; if not, while Theosophy will remain unscathed, the Society will perish-perchance most ingloriously-and the World will suffer...the critical nature of the stage on which we have entered is as well known to the forces that fight against us as to those that fight on our side. No opportunity will be lost of sowing dissension, of taking advantage of mistaken and false moves, of instilling doubt, of augmenting difficulties, of breathing suspicion, so that by any and every means the unity of the Society may be broken and the ranks of our Fellows thinned and thrown into disarray..." Reviewing the history of the last 100 years we can decide whether this prophecy has been fulfilled or not. How many FTS have honored HPB by the close study and learning of that Theosophy which she and the Masters of Wisdom jointly presented ? Are the ranks of the T. S. one pointed, united, wise and active ? Or, is there much work left to be done ? Each one has to think of these things and answer to themselves. Exactly what is/was the work to be done for ones' self and for others ? Returning to the matter of intersecting cycles: -- Simultaneously there is the ending of the first 5,000 years of Kali Yuga cycle ( Total time: 432,000 years for that grand cycle ). In the SECRET DOCTRINE (Vol. I, p. 612) she indicates that the year 1897 will witness a large rent being made in the Veil of Nature whereby "materialistic science will receive a deathblow." This date has passed and we have witnessed in the last 100 year a series of great discoveries, in physics, chemistry, astronomy, mathematics and biochemistry that have revolutionized our concept of the atom and the molecule and the interaction of forces and energies on the most subtlest, as well as the grandest electro-magnetic scales and ranges of measurement. The rediscovery of the "astral body" and the "astral plane" whereby all material forms are made to cohere, and especially those biochemical mixtures in which intelligent consciousness and life of a higher character is seen (plants, animals, humans). Science has in fact already entered the realm of energy that leads to an understanding of the power of the astral and the Pranic energies that make forms possible and given them the life they enjoy as entities with a definite purpose in the great scheme of things. [ Mr. Judge in the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY speaks of this critical date and gives information on this theme on p. 125 of the book. ] The psychological origins and potential achievements of human consciousness - and its unknown ranges - have been sensed, vaguely sketched, and it remains for a serious and concentrated investigation to clear away the concept that all this vast interacting group of diverse molds or model-forms that underlie the many physical forms and keep them "living" is moved by one central cooperative INTELLIGENCE and many INDEPENDENT BUT VOLUNTARILY COOPERATING INTELLIGENCES. Man's consciousness represents one of the most advanced powers focused in such a form at this time, and from this condition the doors open to an understanding of the Universe, its purpose (see SD I 268) and he can understand what his own duty and responsibility is as he passes through the successive degrees of initiation that are possible to him - by his own determination and will. Writing on this concept Mr. Judge in THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY (p. 4) says: this "is an age of transition," when every system of thought, science, religion, government, and society is changing, preparing for an alteration into that state which will permit the race to advance to the point suitable for these elder brothers to introduce their actual presence to our sight." Another article speaks of the "precursors of HPB," of the vow taken by Tsong-Kha-Pa in Tibet to send a mission to the West each hundred years. And we can trace from that date in the 14th Century, the imprint of the work of various "Messengers" whose task it was to revive in the West the memory of the esoteric Wisdom. In the 15th Cent. We had the revival in Florence of the study of Plato spearheaded by Paschalis, Pico della Mirandola and Marsilio Ficino. The next century (16th) saw the work of Giordano Bruno, Paracelsus, Van Helmont, Reuchlin and Trithemius. And then came that of Boehme (17th Cent.), Eugenius Philalethes, and with them the Rosicrucians, Hermetic Philosophers and Fire Philosophers. In the 18th Cent. we have St. Germain, St. Martin, Cagliostro and Mesmer. Also the Cambridge Platonists worked then and so did Thomas Taylor who translated the Greek philosophers into English. HPB speaks to the importance of cycles and dates in her articles: STARS AND NUMBERS Theosophist June 1881 [ ULT Edn., HPB's Articles Vol. III, p. 401 ] OUR CYCLE AND THE NEXT Lucifer Vol. 4, p. 177 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 367 ] THE CYCLE MOVETH Lucifer March 1890 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 355 ] THE NEW CYCLE 1889 La Revue Theosophique March 1889 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 397 ] WILL MASTERS' HELP BE WITHDRAWN IN 1898 UNTIL 1975 ? - Judge, PATH, Nov. 1894, [ W Q Judge's Articles, ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 76 ] ARE WE DESERTED ? -- Judge PATH, December 1892, [ ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 78 ] PROPHECIES BY H P BLAVATSKY -- Judge [ ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 81 ] In closing, here is a passage from the SECRET DOCTRINE where HPB speaks of the future: "...it is the esoteric teachings, and the initiates of the Future, whose mission it is, and will be, to redeem and ennoble once more the primitive conceptions so sadly profaned by its crude and gross application to exoteric dogmas and personations by theological and ecclesiastical religionists. The silent worship of abstract or 'noumenal' Nature, the only divine manifestation, is the one ennobling religion of Humanity." [ SD I 381 fn ) Best wishes, Dallas --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: DALVAL@NWC.NET List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-theos-l-530Y@list.vnet.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 15:12:42 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: PATANJALI and MEDITATION, etc., practices -- Do we know the effects potentially ? Dec 5th 1998 Dallas offers: It is most probable that HPB refrained from speaking of "practices" of various kinds (other than study and meditation on the metaphysics that theosophy clears up) because we do not have the necessary knowledge or philosophical and data background to understand the implications and ramifications of trying those practices. In fact, as I read it, she seems to lump all "practices" under the heading of "Psychism" which she heartily discourages again and again. In view of the vast separation between physical results and spiritual attainments, how can we hope by physical postures, exercises, the inattentive focussing of the will (what is that ?) on "chakras" whose power and force on planes other than the physical are only vaguely described, will be of ultimate bane or benefit to us. To begin with the "chakras" are not physically located at all, but only psychically, astrally, pranically and metaphysically. So the books and teachings given are inaccurate. They are published and taught so that the "gurus" or "swamis" can earn wealth. They do not benefit students. Ask yourselves if you have any serious and well studied record of any one or a group that has actually benefited or mastered the use of these practices - or even attained some modicum of "power." She (HPB) states that she hoped that Theosophy would encourage a change in the "Manas" and the "Buddhi" of the 'race.' It starts with the mind, with thought, with a grasp of the "Fundamental propositions" of the SD (Vol. 1 pp 14-19)- with the study of THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY so that we get some idea of what the inner man is and what it can do. As I understand this, she implies that we have enough Kama (desires and passions) to confuse us, and what we need is an addition of study (Manas) meditation and thought - and for this reason she displays a vast amount of metaphysical facts culled from antiquity in the ancient Theosophical system - and those form the opening training for disciples and students of real occultism - not for those who desire personal powers to be used without care for results - as most do nowadays. I still say that the "moral" aspect of karma and of Theosophy has to be well grasped if we are going to make and real and true long-lasting progress. What constantly amazes me is the willingness for people to take a "leap of faith" into the metaphysical and psychic chasms and abyss without preparation - for "excitement's sake ? We have Theosophy as a base for our progress - what keeps us from studying and learning about it? Excuse all this, but this is what I think we ought to consider, each of us, Best wishes Dallas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 23:45:50 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 25, 1998 In a message dated 11/26/98 12:01:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << >My father would have preferred the single malt, but grandpa would drink >anything you put in front of him. A blunder made, we are told, by Socrates ... >> LOL! My blunder too sometimes. Eureka! And here I was thinking all along that my problem was existential angst. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 23:47:48 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 25, 1998 In a message dated 11/26/98 12:01:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << >Hmmmm, lessee.... I think, therefore I am. Wait, haven't I heard that >somewhere before? Illogical, captain. I am, therefore I think. >> Good one! (I'm just now getting around to answering my e-mail, having taken longer than most to digest the Thanksgiving meal.....) But how do I know that I am? Oh dear, a bit of a sticky wicket. Christine ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:00:18 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 26, 1998 In a message dated 11/27/98 12:00:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, mkr writes: << in intelligence there is the inherent capacity to feel as well as to reason; in intelligence both capacities are equally present, intensely and harmoniously. >> I'm thinking - isn't this the definition of wisdom also? Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 19:36:41 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: "Closing Gate" the period 1987/8 and 1997/98 now pasing on 100 years later Dec 4th 1998 Dear friend: In regard to the "closing" of a "gate in 1897/98 there was much speculation at one time. I have found the best way to answer such questions is to look for the original references and then decide what philosophically we can get out of them in the way of useful and present-time application. Otherwise they remain as an inexplicable memory and a vague unease in our minds. The sun never sets, a period of rest never begins without the hope or the certainty that the economy of Great Nature will always bring on a renewal, a reawakening. And when this happens the work will go one. Even during that which is night to some, there is activity elsewhere. It is a ceaseless urge to grow, to experience, to learn -- and the move to progress which is innate in each one of us, as in all the rest of nature -- even to the tiniest atom. It is the intimation of innate, persistent immortality that leaves its insistent mark everywhere. In her article THE ESOTERIC CHARACTER OF THE GOSPELS ["Lucifer," Nov., Dec. 1887, Feb 1888 ] HPB gives (in a footnote) [ ULT 3 Vol. Edn. Of HPB's Articles, Vol. 3, p. 169 fn ] at the outset an important date relating to occult cycles and the ending of the "Age of Pisces - and the starting of that of Aquarius - a cycle of 2,155 years - not long, but very occult as the influence of sun and zodiac changes in a subtle but definite way (details not all given). HPB predicts that psychologists will thereafter have extra work to do as the psychic idiosyncrasies of humanity will enter on a great change. [ And that means this present - and she also refers to this in her FOURTH MESSAGE TO THE AMERICAN SECTION IN CONVENTION IN 1891: "The period which we have now reached in the cycle that will close between 1897/98 is, and will continue to be one of great conflict and continued strain. If the T.S. can hold through it, good; if not, while Theosophy will remain unscathed, the Society will perish-perchance most ingloriously-and the World will suffer...the critical nature of the stage on which we have entered is as well known to the forces that fight against us as to those that fight on our side. No opportunity will be lost of sowing dissension, of taking advantage of mistaken and false moves, of instilling doubt, of augmenting difficulties, of breathing suspicion, so that by any and every means the unity of the Society may be broken and the ranks of our Fellows thinned and thrown into disarray..." Reviewing the history of the last 100 years we can decide whether this prophecy has been fulfilled or not. How many FTS have honored HPB by the close study and learning of that Theosophy which she and the Masters of Wisdom jointly presented ? Are the ranks of the T. S. one pointed, united, wise and active ? Or, is there much work left to be done ? Each one has to think of these things and answer to themselves. Exactly what is/was the work to be done for ones' self and for others ? Returning to the matter of intersecting cycles: -- Simultaneously there is the ending of the first 5,000 years of Kali Yuga cycle ( Total time: 432,000 years for that grand cycle ). In the SECRET DOCTRINE (Vol. I, p. 612) she indicates that the year 1897 will witness a large rent being made in the Veil of Nature whereby "materialistic science will receive a deathblow." This date has passed and we have witnessed in the last 100 year a series of great discoveries, in physics, chemistry, astronomy, mathematics and biochemistry that have revolutionized our concept of the atom and the molecule and the interaction of forces and energies on the most subtlest, as well as the grandest electro-magnetic scales and ranges of measurement. The rediscovery of the "astral body" and the "astral plane" whereby all material forms are made to cohere, and especially those biochemical mixtures in which intelligent consciousness and life of a higher character is seen (plants, animals, humans). Science has in fact already entered the realm of energy that leads to an understanding of the power of the astral and the Pranic energies that make forms possible and given them the life they enjoy as entities with a definite purpose in the great scheme of things. [ Mr. Judge in the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY speaks of this critical date and gives information on this theme on p. 125 of the book. ] The psychological origins and potential achievements of human consciousness - and its unknown ranges - have been sensed, vaguely sketched, and it remains for a serious and concentrated investigation to clear away the concept that all this vast interacting group of diverse molds or model-forms that underlie the many physical forms and keep them "living" is moved by one central cooperative INTELLIGENCE and many INDEPENDENT BUT VOLUNTARILY COOPERATING INTELLIGENCES. Man's consciousness represents one of the most advanced powers focused in such a form at this time, and from this condition the doors open to an understanding of the Universe, its purpose (see SD I 268) and he can understand what his own duty and responsibility is as he passes through the successive degrees of initiation that are possible to him - by his own determination and will. Writing on this concept Mr. Judge in THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY (p. 4) says: this "is an age of transition," when every system of thought, science, religion, government, and society is changing, preparing for an alteration into that state which will permit the race to advance to the point suitable for these elder brothers to introduce their actual presence to our sight." Another article speaks of the "precursors of HPB," of the vow taken by Tsong-Kha-Pa in Tibet to send a mission to the West each hundred years. And we can trace from that date in the 14th Century, the imprint of the work of various "Messengers" whose task it was to revive in the West the memory of the esoteric Wisdom. In the 15th Cent. We had the revival in Florence of the study of Plato spearheaded by Paschalis, Pico della Mirandola and Marsilio Ficino. The next century (16th) saw the work of Giordano Bruno, Paracelsus, Van Helmont, Reuchlin and Trithemius. And then that of Boehme (17th Cent.), Eugenius Philalethes, and with them the Rosicrucians, Hermetic Philosophers and Fire Philosophers. In the 18th Cent. we have St. Germain, St. Martin, Cagliostro and Mesmer. Also the Cambridge Platonists worked then and so did Thomas Taylor who translated the Greek philosophers HPB speaks to the importance of cycles and dates in her articles: STARS AND NUMBERS Theosophist June 1881 [ ULT Edn., HPB's Articles Vol. III, p. 401 ] OUR CYCLE AND THE NEXT Lucifer Vol. 4, p. 177 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 367 ] THE CYCLE MOVETH Lucifer March 1890 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 355 ] THE NEW CYCLE 1889 La Revue Theosophique March 1889 [ ULT Edn., Vol. I, p. 397 ] WILL MASTERS' HELP BE WITHDRAWN IN 1898 UNTIL 1975 ? -- Judge PATH, Nov. 1894, [ W Q Judge's Articles, ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 76 ARE WE DESERTED ? -- Judge PATH, December 1892, [ ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 78 ] PROPHECIES BY H P BLAVATSKY -- Judge [ ULT Edn., Vol. II, p. 81 ] In closing, here is a quote from the SECRET DOCTRINE where HPB speaks of the future: "...it is the esoteric teachings, and the initiates of the Future, whose mission it is, and will be, to redeem and ennoble once more the primitive conceptions so sadly profaned by its crude and gross application to exoteric dogmas and personations by theological and ecclesiastical religionists. The silent worship of abstract or 'noumenal' Nature, the only divine manifestation, is the one ennobling religion of Humanity." [ SD I 381 fn ) Best wishes, Dallas From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:46:56 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World reply to Eldon = KARMA AND ETERNITY vs. LIBERATION IN ONE'S LIFE-TIME Dec 3rd 1998 Dallas offers: Theosophy presents the incredibly old concept of the evolution of the MONAD which is ATMA and BUDDHI conjoined ( SD I 268). Theosophy sates that all beings in this program have to pass through the "human stage" of self-consciousness. The Human stage is one where the mind principle (Manas) is given its entire freedom to survey its own condition and that of the world and universe around it. It is an age of self-discovery and a study of differentiation not only physical plane of effects but on many of the invisible planes of cause. All is interrelated. The Universe, our World, us, down to the least of 'Life-atoms' is intelligent, alive, conscious each in its own degree. The MONAD draws to itself and "grows" so to say with the passage of time and the witnessing of its experiences in various forms of substance and matter. At first it participates in Natural evolution (under the general Law of Karma) unconsciously, or rather non-self-consciously, since its embodies consciousness in some degree all the time. Having brought itself and the "matter" (or substance) associated with it, up to the point of self-consciousness other MEN who have passed through these grades many aeons back come to its aid and help to enlighten, to vivify its MENTAL faculty. Like the mind of a child grows from contact with its parents and elders and at school, so the mind of the MONAD now become self-conscious opens, identifies itself to itself, and grows. We as humans are in this stage. As we have elders and teachers in this incarnation so when MANAS WAS LIGHTED in us (over 18 million years ago Theosophy teaches) this was done by MEN who had become wise aeons back. Their desire was/is to have us raise our mental capacity to theirs. WE have the potential. We are urged to use it. And, like all children in school, we rise in any class according to the effort that we put out. Some desire to forge ahead, and learn by rote, the data that they are supplied with. Some desire to prove to themselves the validity of that data, and take a longer more analytical route. Some say to themselves: "I did not ask to be here, I do not feel obliged to exert myself. I will do the minimum and seek my pleasures in some other form of activity, if I can devise a way to do this. They follow still another route - and so there are many degrees and variants in mental and psychic/desire/passional attitudes The point is that T teaches that those who are the most successful in this endeavor seem to discern the fact that karma is a universal law that moves to fairness, equity, and justice, and one of its principal criteria is that it urges all beings to become "perfect." This means to know all that can be known about the Universe so that they can take their place as its "assistants," "builders," "creators." They, when successful in their study and "path" become the Chelas and then the Adepts and the Mahatmas. They perform the formative work when a World reawakens from pralaya and assist the forms that will be needed for evolutionary progress for all aspects of the ONE CONSCIOUSNESS and its many RAYS to advance. They are spoken of as the Rishis, the Wise, the "Fathers," the Prajapatis, the "Creators," "the Dhyan Chohans," the Buddhas," etc., and there are many degrees of wisdom and of responsibility. The main point is that his eternal progress is anything but "boring." Continual and joyful work - for ourselves, as well as for all others - for the true growth is that which can be shared. And there is no joy like meeting and finding a kindred spirit with which to consult and who can assist us. Thus we find that Theosophy paints a view of our situation which is active, and continually widening in its aspect of living. One of the most important things to bear in mind is that this life is not unique, nor the only one we will ever know. It is one of many - just as each of our days in this life, has been one of many - and there is a continuous, an immortal tread of memory and consciousness that binds all the experiences we have had together. Reincarnation and karma as key ideas are most valuable to us, not only to satisfy our own yearnings and aspirations, but they give the comfort of knowing that we are never alone and that our friends and family will be always available at any time that we reincarnate - so the loss of companionship is done away with. Additionally, we will always have something interesting to do. Our attitude towards life and living makes the whole difference. If one is pessimistic bout either, then the whole of our horizon - that which we paint to ourselves and to others is dark and foreboding. We make or break our own futures. And that is what theosophy seems to tell me. Dallas. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 04:44:07 +0100 From: "Frank Reitemeyer" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 29, 1998 >Frank wrote: > >>Ironically, this is a parody of Jerry's style... > >Frank, WHAT is a parody of Jerry's style? > >Fortunately for you, I just sent a post to this list talking about keeping >one's mind focused on compassion because, you see, if I hadn't just sent >that post I would have asked you something akin to the following, "Frank, >did you take your medication today?" > > >Kym Good question! it implicates that there remains hope! I just thought you have mixed up Dallas with Jerry. Two days ago you wrote about Dallas: "A simple sentence like "Jerry, you are narrow-minded, illogical, limited in scope, and unclear in thought; but I, Dallas the Great, am not." would have summed up nicely what you wrote in way too many fluffy and phoney words." --- I fear your expression of compassion could be misunderstood by Dallas an attack. Frank