From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 23:15:42 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 31, 1999 Dear Dallas, Usually, I just write "Dallas wrote" but I feel guilty because you address the posts directly to the person to whom you are answering, even preceding their name with a "dear." So, since I hate feeling guilty. . .see above. >Quack - quack ! Sorry not India (though I lived there 30 >ago for 35 years) - I am now in California (where I was born). It's a good thing I didn't bet my life on that - I would have sworn you were in India. I too was born in California, spent most of my life there and somehow, somewhere I did something really, really bad, because I now find myself in Idaho - a place where one's patience is truly tested. >As to my being funny in bird language - well I can't help that >impression, but, to me I am quite serious, and try to present an >augmented dimension of consideration based on what I have learned >from Theosophy. Yes, Dallas, I know you are serious; we just disagree frequently. And since I know it all and am perfect, anyone who disagrees with me is "quacky." Again I say "Life. Who knew?" Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 01 Feb 1999 06:11:14 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Display of Message One of the improvements I noticed in Netscape 4.5 when displaying e-mail is that the quoted lines in the msg can be set to display in bold face. This makes it easier to separate the quotes from the actual message. I am sure there are other e-mail clients which can do the same. If you are using Netscape 4.5, you may want to try this and you will like it. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 16:02:56 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: January 31, 1999 Soul and incarnation Feb 1st Kym: Theosophical doctrines state that all forms have a psychic and a spiritual counterpart which energizes them and the Spiritual gives life and perception, the psychic gives sensitivity and limits to the form. Spirit and mental side of the psychic are the immortal parts of each of us, as humans. [ Psychic is a triad as it is the meeting point of intuition on one side and instinct on the other, both being monitored by the mind as an independent faculty - brain is only a tool. ] Mortal parts of man's make up is body, astral electro-magnetic form (a lattice work on which the physical molecules, cells, etc...arrange themselves, and the seat of instinct desire, passion and impulse, which in mankind is regulated by the mind and the intuitive sense of LAW all working together. Do have a look at the KEY TO THEOSOPHY to disentangle what I write for brevity. It is all there. Brief incarnation of a child is a disappointment to the immortal Ego/soul. It occurs under Karma, and also may bring pain to parents. Why ? In each case there are different causes which spring from past lives, as the 3 Egos, Father, Mother and child meet closely so that a new baby is born. Pain usually drives those who feel it to inquire into the reason for it. If we are responsible the answer is one thing. (and we seek for causes and answers and the sequence of events that lead up to the death, pain and questioning.) If we feel we are irresponsible, and the victims of an incomprehensibly cruel "God" or "Demon" it is another. (we refuse to ask further and place our faith on the priests of whatever religion we trust.) The question is which ? Saying it is only Nature's way and we cannot inquire is not a helpful answer either. (why is it that science and psychology provide us with partial and disjointed answers ?) How can these facts be consolidated ? Where do we start ? Don't know how else to say it. Much detail is left out, as the basic concepts of Immortality and the operation of Karmic law have to be seen here. (if we are going to try to explain evolution as a total experience, which includes occasional infant deaths.) Hope this helps somewhat Dal. PS It might help if we establish three comparative columns 1. What does Religion say and what are the explanations offered 2. What does Science say -- ditto - 3. What does Theosophy offer -- ditto -- In this way we can gradually assemble information for finding out what works best in gaining an understanding of the reason for such a tragedy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:14:27 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 14, 1999 In a message dated 1/15/99 12:01:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, Murray writes: << a greater ability to empathise with others >> I would agree and say this was the greatest gift I received from my own grief experience(s). I really understand suffering from the "inside" now, not just in the abstract, and as a result am more understanding of others. It has also lessened my arrogance - I no longer assume bad things only happen to other people. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:23:56 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 16, 1999 In a message dated 1/17/99 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << Yes, I have often wondered what the newly-dead experience - whether they grieve, have to adjust, miss their loved ones, etc. In Western society the dead are often portrayed as going merrily into heaven with not a thought of what or who remains behind. >> A great book on this topic is "Life After Death" by Dr. Kenneth Ring. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:42:12 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Some quoations on Reincarnation and Devachan == Feb 2nd 1999 Part 1. THE AREA WHERE REINCARNATION/REEMBODIMENT OCCURS All worlds...are subject to rebirth again and again. BHAGAVAD GITA 60 ...every atom is alive and has the germ of self-consciousness. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 62 Both I [THE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT] and thou [Man] have passed through many births, O Harasser of thy foes; mine are known unto me, but thou knowest not of thine...For never to an evil place goeth one who doeth good... Being thus born again, he comes in contact with the knowledge which belonged to him in his former body...[and]...striving with all his might, [he] obtaineth perfection because of efforts continued through many births. BHAGAVAD GITA 31 This immortal thinker [man]... having such vast powers and possibilities, all his because of his intimate connection with every secret part of Nature, from which he has been built up, stands at the top of an immense and silent evolution. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY 60 SPIRIT--THE PERCEIVER WITHIN ALL The Knower is never born, nor dies; nor is it from anywhere, nor did it become anything. Unborn, eternal, immemorial, this Ancient is not slain when the body is slain...this Self is hidden in the heart of man...Understanding this great Lord, the Self, bodiless in bodies, stable among the unstable, the wise man cannot grieve. KATHA UPANISHAD 41 The soul is the Perceiver; is assuredly vision itself, pure and simple, unmodified, and looks directly upon ideas. For the sake of the soul alone, the Universe exists. YOGA SUTRAS of PATANJALI 24 JUSTICE AND EQUITY RULE THE UNIVERSE -- KARMA Each man's life, the outcome of his former living is. The bygone wrongs bring forth sorrows and woes, the bygone right breeds bliss. LIGHT of ASIA (Bk 8, p. 143) WHAT AND WHO IS "MAN," "SPIRIT," "LAW" ? Man is an immortal soul. All nature is sentient. Down to the smallest atom, all is soul and spirit, ever evolving under the rule of law, which is inherent in the whole. Nature exists for no other purpose than the soul's experience. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 2 "...this universe [is] for the experience and emancipation of the soul, for the purpose of raising the entire mass of manifested matter up to the stature, nature, and dignity of conscious god-hood. The great aim is to reach self-consciousness by and through the perfecting after transformation of the whole mass of matter as well as what we now call soul. The aim for present man is his initiation into complete knowledge. As to the whole mass of matter, the doctrine is that it will all be raised to man's estate when man has gone further on himself. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 62-3 All the matter which the human Ego gathered to it retains the stamp or photographic impression of the human being, the matter transmigrates to the lower level when given an animal impress by the ego. OCEAN THEOSOPHY p. 68 THE FIELD OF EVOLUTION AND EXPERIENCE We are not appearing for the first time when we come upon this planet; but have pursued a long, an immeasurable course of activity and intelligent perception on other systems of globes. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 2-3 Thou art THYSELF, the object of thy search. VOICE OF THE SILENCE p. 23-4 Man is a spiritual being. The Ego of each man is immortal, reappearing clothed in bodies, on each occasion different, it only appears to be mortal; it always remains the substratum and support for the personality acting upon the stage of life. ECHOES p. 8 At every conceivable point in the Universe there are 'lives;' nowhere can be found a spot that is dead; and each 'life' is forever hastening onward to higher evolution. ECHOES p. 9-10 Reincarnations is the pilgrimage of our own nature...the end to be reached is self-dependence with perfect calmness and clearness. ECHOES p. 32 When a being dies, he emits, as it were, a mass of force or energy, which goes to make up the new personality when he shall have reincarnated. In this energy is found the summation of the life just given up. ECHOES p. 36 The life of man is held to be a pilgrimage... Starting from the great ALL, radiating like a spark from the central fire, he gathers experience in all ages, under all rulers, civilizations and customs, ever engaged in a pilgrimage to the shrine from which he came. He is now the ruler and now the slave; to-day at the pinnacle of wealth and power, to-morrow at the bottom of the ladder, perhaps in abject misery, but ever the same being. ECHOES p. 31 The end to be reached is self-dependence with perfect calmness and clearness ... (the) whole life is a persistent pursuit of the fast-moving soul, which, although appearing to stand still, can outdistance the lightening. ECHOES p. 32-3 RECOGNITION OF LOVED ONES ON REBIRTH ...recognition cannot depend, in the spiritual and mental life, on physical appearance...those who are like unto each other, and love each other will be reincarnated together, whenever conditions permit. Recognition depends on inner sight, and not on outward appearance. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 71-2 When we come again, we do not take up the body of someone else, nor another's deeds; but, are like an actor who plays many parts...the great life of the soul is a drama, and each new life and rebirth, another act in which we assume another part. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 74 The friends and relatives which are life unto each other must incarnate together until, by reason of differentiation of character, they cannot undo the law of attraction [and so] remain in company. Not unless and until they become different do they separate from each other. ECHOES p. 45 Those whom you help will help you in other lives. The very moment we come near to where they are, they at once extend assistance...Thus the members of the whole human family reciprocally act on one another. ECHOES. p. 45-6 MIND IS RE-EMBODIED The powers of mind and the laws governing its motion, its attachments, and its detachments show that its reembodiment must be here...To permit the involved entity to transfer itself to another scene before it had overcome all the causes drawing it here and without having worked out its responsibilities to other entities would be contrary to the powerful forces which continually operate upon it. Ocean of Theosophy. p. 79 ONE LIFE INADEQUATE FOR FULL EXPERIENCE One short human life gives no grounds for the production of the inner nature...The soul must be reborn until it has ceased to set in motion the cause of rebirth, after having developed character up to its possible limit when every experience has been passed through. Ocean of Theosophy p. 81 There is a vast range of powers latent in man, which may be developed if opportunity be given. Knowledge, infinite in scope and diversity, lies before us. We have high aspirations with no time to reach up to their measure, while the passions and desires, selfish motives and ambitions, war with us and among themselves. All these have to be tried, conquered, used, subdued. One life is not enough for this. Ocean of Theosophy p. 82-3 SENSE OF IDENTITY Each feels he has an individuality of his own, a personal identity which bridges over gaps made by sleep, and temporary lesions in the brain. This identity never breaks from beginning to end of life in the normal person, and only the persistence and eternal character of the soul will account for it. Ocean of Theosophy p. 82 Inherent ideas, common to the whole race, are due to recollection of such ideas implanted in the human mind at the very beginning of its evolutionary career by those Brothers and sages who were perfected in former ages long before the development of this globe began. Ocean of Theosophy p. 87 The images made in the "Astral Light" (an imponderable, tenuous medium which inter-penetrates the entire globe, and in which the acts and thoughts of every man are felt and impressed, to be afterward reflected again) persist for centuries...upon returning to earth-life we are affected for good or evil by the conduct, the doctrine and the aspirations of preceding nations and men. ECHOES p. 5 Since we are made up of a mass of lives, our thoughts and acts affect those atoms or lives, and impress them with a dharma [duty] of their own. ECHOES p. 40 Each man is seen as a fashioner of the fate for his next fleeting earth personality...in his own hand is the decree...No one but ourselves punishes or rewards in this or any life. ECHOES p. 44 - 45 The nature of each incarnation depends upon the balance as struck of the merit and demerit of the previous life or lives--upon the way the man has lived and thought; and this law is inflexible and wholly just. EPITOME p. 23 That which is known as 'you' is the result of one continuous existence of an entity. Your present body and your soul (or the personality) are the results of a series of co-existence. The Individuality, or spirit, is the cause of the Soul, and personality, or what is called 'you.' You are the manifestation of an entity and are the result of many appearances of that entity upon the stage of action in various personalities. W.Q.J. ARTICLES Vol. II p. 452 MEMORY AND REBIRTH Memory of a prior life does not prove we passed through that, nor is non-remembering an objection. We forget the greater part of the events of the years and days of this life. The entire effect on the character is kept and made a part of ourselves. The whole mass of detail is preserved in the inner man to be one day fully brought back when we are perfected. All are subject to the limitations imposed on the Ego by the new brain in each life. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p 76 By living according to the dictates of the Soul, the brain may at last be made porous to the Soul's recollections...We should be very miserable if the deeds and scenes of our former lives were not hidden from our view until by discipline we became able to bear a knowledge of them. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 76 FUNCTION OF THOSE WHO GRADUATE ON EARTH The most intelligent being in the universe, man, has never...been without a friend, but has a line of "elder brothers" who continually watch over the progress of the less progressed, preserve the knowledge gained, and continually seek for opportunities of drawing the developing intelligence of the race to consider the great truths concerning the destiny of soul. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 3 The Elder Brothers of humanity are men who were perfected in former periods of evolution ... when, out of the Great Unknown, there came forth the visible universes (which)...are eternal in their coming and going. The object of these mighty waves is the production of perfect Man, the evolution...after the struggle to acquire piety, of the soul which consists in knowing God, and injuring none, such a soul becomes all intelligence. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 6 The course of evolution is the drama of the soul. There are beings in the universe whose intelligence is as much beyond ours, as ours exceeds that of the black beetle; and, who take an active part in the government of the natural order of things. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 2 Nature intends us to use the matter which comes into our bodies and astral body for the purpose among others, of benefiting the matter by the impress it gets from association with the human Ego...it retains the stamp or photographic impression of the human being; the matter transmigrates to the lower level when given an animal impress by the Ego. OCEAN of THEOSOPHY p. 68 The most exalted beings still in the flesh are known as Sages, Rishis, Brothers, Masters. The process of evolution up to reunion with the Divine is and includes successive elevation from rank to rank of power and usefulness...the process of spiritual development (includes)...entire eradication of selfishness...cultivation of broad, generous sympathy in, and effort for the good of others...cultivation of the inner, spiritual man by meditation...control of fleshly appetites and desires...careful performance of every duty. EPITOME p. 24-25 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:33:01 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 16, 1999 In a message dated 1/17/99 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << It's hard to remove imprints that have been hammered into you for years and years - only later do you realize the damage done. Now I've swung almost completely to the other side, I think - hopefully, in time, balance will come. >> Kym, you're singing my song here! I know from personal experience whereof you speak. Sometimes I think that tension will never completely disappear - but maybe that's part of what makes life interesting, a work-in-progress. I've found that what I believe (or even know) intellectually by the light of day, and what I feel deep down in my gut, alone in the dark facing my fears at three in the morning, are not always in sync, and the deep down stuff often comes from those imprints that were hammered into me at an early age, and that seem etched into my bones despite my best efforts to grow out of them. I've kind of learned to live with them, like a chronic skin condition that you can ameliorate but never completely shake off. Every once in a while you have to face the facts and stare down the oppressor, and act in spite of its bleatings, and call in the Great Dermatologist or pour an entire bottle of spiritual Desenex on your head if things get too far out of hand... I guess there is even a charm in the conflict somewhere - it makes me a little less smug and more understanding of others' similar struggles. Well, gotta go. Gotta scratch an itch. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:33:47 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 16, 1999 In a message dated 1/17/99 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << There have been times, in the past, while grieving, that I have awoken with the feeling that "something" happened - something that helped me, something that comforted me, something that told me all is well. >> This happens to me in waking moments also. I often think it is my father, sending caring vibes from beyond. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:42:29 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: grief In a message dated 1/17/99 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << IMHO, these may be dreams by association - you associate the person (perhaps) with the body they formerly occupied, rather than the soul/spirit that you actually knew, loved, and talked with before. >> Interesting distinction. I remember when my father died, I was so terrified to look into the casket for fear of what I would see and how I would feel. My heart was pounding when I walked up to it, but I felt it was something I had to do. Well, to my surprise when I looked in, a wave of relief came over me and the powerful message, "Your father is not joined to this body anymore. The person you knew and loved as your father is somewhere good and safe." He is not *this*, I thought, and was comforted. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 20:47:53 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 16, 1999 In a message dated 1/17/99 12:01:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << As I get older, I am finding that I have more "dead" friends than live ones. >> I gotta tell ya, this one really woke me up. Makes me wonder in general - does that mean, for example, that dead white males could be relevant to the present time, after all? Wait - I'm getting a message from them - they say they are communicating with the Republicans right this minute! :) (advance apologies to any Republicans in the audience) Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:14:40 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: HPB criticism In a message dated 1/19/99 12:02:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, Dallas writes: << As to defence, -- you are free to take your path, and I, mine. But if I see criticism of HPB I will ask for chapter and verse proofs. I consider that a "dharma." >> Asking for chapter and verse is reasonable, but I do get the feeling from this thread overall that there is a danger that criticism and attack are being confused. It seems to me that someone may have a criticism of something in HPB without necessarily wanting to attack or destroy. One may not be able to provide cites because the criticism might not be based on discrepancies of that sort - it may rather be that the person understands something in HPB but simply disagrees with it or dislikes it. Or the person may simply be wrong. I wonder if we can "live and let live" to some extent? I agree that accuracy is important, especially when citing sources for one's statements - but to escalate any and all criticism of Her (with a capital "H", no less) and her sacred writings to the level of an attack (on God?) demanding a vigorous defense necessitated by grave moral obligation seems a bit excessive, and could even have a chilling effect on open discussion for some - note, for example, that any dissenting speech in China is considered subversive of the system and the resulting effect on people's desire and capacity to speak freely. (For example, I hesitated to post this for that very reason - the intimidation factor of fearing that even a mild defense of a person's right to criticize HPB in the abstract might lead to a public thrashing. But I felt morally obligated to make these points, and so took the risk. I really do find the vast majority of your postings, Dallas, to be informative and enlightening. And just for the record, I am not anti-HPB myself - the jury's still out on that issue, as far as I'm concerned. I freely admit that I just don't know enough yet to have an informed opinion, and your postings often help to educate me.) One more point - I think that not only the great Instructors, but also the rest of us lowly unwashed semi-literate monads who are still stuck in the mud of ego and the cycle of death and rebirth are nevertheless worthy of respect and even reverence, cite-less (and sightless) though we may be. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:32:02 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: books and experience In a message dated 1/19/99 12:02:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << When we begin to share our *experience,* then perhaps we are doing something useful and beneficial both for others and ourselves. >> Thanks for pointing out that book knowledge is not necessarily the highest form of knowledge. Theories that work out perfectly on paper can show quite a few cracks when exposed to the cold, hard (or warm and soft) light of experience. The most well-read person I have ever known - a genius, philosopher and chess master who read thousands and thousands of books - was a chronically suicidal, anxious, chain-smoking, chain-drinking, depressed, and bleak person. Observing that made me realize that books, while great and useful tools on occasion, ain't everything. The one who wins in the end is not necessarily the one who has read the most books or whose logic is the most flawless, but rather the one who can tread lightly through the chaotic minefield that is real life and come out singing, who has managed to dodge the spiritual bombs that whiz past and even beat a few swords into plowshares, and who then reaches back to help (en)light(en) the way for other sentient beings. And isn't that what true Buddhahood is all about finally? Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:38:42 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: citing texts In a message dated 1/19/99 12:02:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << Having staked my claim, others will be able to cite my writing as a "proof" text if they wish. But let's get real, shall we? >> Ah yes, but isn't the crucial question (that determines the ultimate worth of your text) whether you can be cited as a primary, versus secondary or tertiary source? :) I myself hope to live to see the day when I shall be worthy of being cited as the ever-coveted primary source for someone else's writing. -copyright 1999 by Christine "You May Quote Me" Hanson From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:56:30 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 01, 1999 Feb 2nd Dear Kym: My sister Sophia lives in Bangalore South India (State of Mysore) where she started a private School around 1959 or 1960 with my Mother. ( East-West School - classes from kindergarten to pre-university - current enrolment is over 700 ) Our whole family was interested in studying Theosophy and finding out if it presented a fair picture and explanation of our world situation - not necessarily in conflict with current educational precepts, but as a supplementary which pulled together some of the loose ends and gaps that still crop up. And that's the basis from which I think and write. Seemed to me as time passed that the information was valuable and answered many things we ask ourselves. Also, many of the strange events and accidents of life. Dal. ========================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 13:56:35 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 01, 1999 == What is the purpose of Theosophy ? What did HPB do ? Feb 2nd Dear Christine: I think I understand what you say when you speak of your reaction to some of HPB's statements. In many cases she makes statements that I found to be "explained" in another part of her writings - and that can be exasperating, as it makes one wait for a long time in some cases for a reasonable answer. Theosophy isn't a "quick study." But I have found that when she writes, she does explain away so many of the current gaps in knowledge and information that I have become convinced that Theosophy covers our information needs with great reasonableness - not so that we will "believe" blindly, but rather that we may trust it, and still have the latitude and the need to "find out" for ourselves. I think that it encourages the attitude of "attention" and "constant vigilance" and does not reject these. In that sense it is not a "belief" system that demands blind adherence to "authority." There is a vast difference between stating facts that one knows and insisting that others adopt their expression even if they do not understand. Theosophy rejects such a concept and demands individual investigation as a vigorous part of learning. >From that point of view it does not conform with the normal concept of a "religion." But, is we look at "religion" as the binding together of people and ideas, then what it does (for me) is to encourage me to discover if its propositions are facts. So I reach out to anyone who has concepts similar or opposed to mine. You might call it a "do it yourself religion." In that case it assumes the position of philosophy and science, as both logic and observation (and truth in reporting) are essential to it as a "whole." HPB made no claims for herself, only that she was a "transmitter." And the transmission consisted in information which ancient Sages (who had taught themselves about Nature and her workings long, long ago) felt it necessary for anyone of us to know about. (see SD I 272-3 for a description of this method of study.) >From that point of view it is the presentation of a course in the study of Nature and of one's self and of others. It tends to universalize and impersonalize, so as to avoid any hard and fast ideas that stem from a personal bias -- of one or a few individuals. So, pursuing this, one can see that some things become clearer and others seem darker, and we are left to distinguish between both, without any coercion. The value of a "chat" group such as this is that we can share what we discover and by comparison we can secure a greater assurance of accuracy. The main thrust of Theosophy is that our Consciousness and Intelligence are the result of our being, at core, an eternal being - a PERCEIVER - a Unit Ray of the ONE UNIVERSAL ABSOLUTENESS. As we travel through time and experience, we reincarnate. The Universe in its operative and evolutionary progress has provided vast and infinitely sensitive plans of operation, and these strict rules of cooperation involve every aspect of living Nature and all is components. Our physical, emotional, mental and "spiritual" aspects (principles) are a part of the living tools of which the whole Universe is formed, from the minutest sub-atomic particle to the grates range of SPACE. We Perceive these, living and operating around and in us - as our bodies are made of the living, basic Life-Atoms of nature. We, as Perceivers, are Life-Atoms that have acquired self-consciousness over an enormously long evolution, and we are now proceeding to the acquirement of that experience and knowledge that will enable us to see the most minute, as well as the grandest aspects of the whole Universe. This is not a process that binds us to blind-belief but rather, it s free, and interiorly, innately, we know we are free beings. We are in the process of self-consciously accelerating that capacity. Time is not a factor. Our character and innate natures are evidence of the experience we have stored. Our present life is evidence of the lessons we can learn now, as well as the good and the bad things we have done in the past ( of this life, as well as of past lives). And that is called in general Karma. [ Karma is thus the Laws that rule the Universe or a solar system, and the adjustments that pursue an individual who knowingly or unknowingly breaks the rules of brotherhood and compassion. ] All these facts, we can verify by carefully reviewing them in our minds and determining how much we know and what additional areas we need to become competent in. We are presented with a tangible "Goal." It is the acquirement of all the knowledge and wisdom that he entire Univese offers. This is mind-boggling to our brain-mind as we know we do not have time in any one life to encompass such a goal. But if we take the idea of immorality for the REAL MIND - the eternal Pilgrim, called sometimes the HIGHER EGO in us, then we can see that reincarnations and a string of personalities is like a series of "days" experiences at a school - the vast School of Life. I hope this may be of some service to you in understanding the difference between a teaching and a "teacher" - such as HPB was. She did not come to present those ideas to any one religion, nation, science, or a group of academics. She came to offer them to mankind so that any one, with any background, could think about them and then see if they were reasonable and worth using for themselves. She is thus the despair of the academics who limit themselves to a specific area of study. Theosophy being universal in the past, draws for its modern expression, words and ideas that can be traced to older religions and philosophies, and because it is ageless, it mixes up the key words so as to emphasize key ideas that are common in all of them. Theosophy in its modern presentation can be read and understood by those whose background may derived from any of the great religious, philosophical or scientific fields. I do hope this proves to be of some us. Best wishes, as always, Dallas ============== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 19:25:04 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: where oh where has my little Theosophist gone? In a message dated 1/22/99 12:01:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << Subject: Re: Where did everyone go? > >I think everyone is subscribed. May be as a coincidence, theyhave not >found time to respond with msgs. That is the case with me. >> I've been plowing through my e-mailbox that has been backlogged since Christmastime. I'm just up to the 1/22 messages now! Christine (2/2/99) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 19:51:04 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: Clinton In a message dated 1/24/99 12:01:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, Kym writes: << not ALL people appreciate Clinton's attempts at helping the poor, minorities, women, gays and lesbians, etc., through changes in federal laws. Many powerful people do not wish to share or lose the power they have enjoyed for quite a few years - it is natural that they will fight to hold on to it. Hence, the acceptance and applause of a prosecutorial investigation that, if it had happened to them, they would have never tolerated. . .. While watching the current Senate hearings, I find myself especially distressed at how petty and malicious the prosecutors have been. >> I think you have hit the nail on the head. Their purported efforts to "save America" from the likes of Clinton is really, underneath that stated purpose, a desire to knock out somebody who by his actions, appointments, travels, and statements, threatens *their* sense of what America should look like - (white, Republican, heterosexual, and Christian), not what America really does look like. They really don't give a %@$&* about the citizens or their opinions, I think. One of them (I think it was Asa Hutchinson) even had the nerve to explain that our system isn't really a "pure" democracy, and the Republicans must provide leadership for the rest of us ignoramuses. It just goes to show you how very important it is to be careful who we vote for - and how quickly tyranny can threaten to take hold when we are looking the other way. They are petty and malicious because they don't have a good enough case for impeachment, so are trying to drive Clinton into the political dirt by embarrassing the hell out of him, over and over again. But I think (hope) the ploy is backfiring on them, and they are growing desperate - another reason for the maliciousness. (Too bad Clinton left so much "ammunition" lying around, though...) Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 19:53:56 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 23, 1999 In a message dated 1/24/99 12:01:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, Kym writes: << I wish more people were watching the hearings - what the media and some politicians have many people (even those who support him) believing about what Clinton did is simply not true. >> Agreed - I happened to be home sick for three days exactly during the Judiciary Committee hearings in the House, and I watched the entire blessed thing. I wished that all Americans could have had that chance (to watch the hearings, not to be sick!). It became painfully obvious to me what was *really* going on. I was outraged and launched a letter-writing campaign. BTW, check out the website "www.moveon.org" if anyone is interested in the public campaign to "censure and move on." Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:01:59 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: Clinton In a message dated 1/24/99 12:01:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, Alan writes: << while the job of running the country (which is what the Congress and the Senate should be giving their attention to) is being left in the hands of the defendant! From this side of the water, your "leaders" seem totally crazy. irresponsible, and will be writing a chapter in history very different from the one they are claiming to write. >> Well, Alan, I gotta tell ya they seem totally crazy and irresponsible from this side of the water too (Ground Zero, downtown Washington, DC). And small- minded. And malicious. And power-hungry. And hypocritical. And self- serving. How did these people get into office in the first place??? Who voted for them anyway? It seems like some weird never-ending nightmare, eclipsing all the real business that desperately needs to be conducted (e.g., health care, education, crime, social security). I hope that history will judge them harshly. I hope that Americans will wake up and vote more carefully in future elections. I think too many Republicans in Congress right now are more interested in posturing and posing and maintaining their positions than they are in running the country. They are sucking up to the far religious right, who send them lots of money - and ignoring their constituencies and everyone else. They have decided Clinton should not be president, and to hell with the majority of Americans who disagree with them and who elected him. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:11:13 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: karma cites In a message dated 1/26/99 12:01:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, Dallas writes: << For instance: if you can access http://www.blavatsky.net you will find in their Menu hyperlinks to lists of articles by HPB and WQJ and in both lists you can access their articles on KARMA. Those are worth reading for a succinct answer. >> Thanks, I'll try that site. I'm pretty sure I could order those books from Quest Publishing. I have an abridged copy of the Secret Doctrine - I've read pieces of it but found it somewhat turgid, daunting, and difficult to parse. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:33:24 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: clones etc. In a message dated 1/29/99 12:02:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << Another point raised was that when you get a transplant, or blood transfusion you get some of the essence of that donor. >> I have also heard that this can happen in organ transplants. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:38:08 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 29, 1999 In a message dated 1/30/99 12:01:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << Cloning has been successful in humans - and I think the soul can enter a body whether it came from a tube or a womb. >> A human being has not yet been successfully cloned, unless you are referring to the effect of fertility drugs in producing multiple births, but Kym makes the same point I just posted earlier, that a clone is genetically like an identical twin. The more I think about the soul issue, the more it seems obvious that a human clone would have a soul just like an identical twin. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:43:48 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: clones In a message dated 1/30/99 12:01:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << exactly my thougt: it will be part of the universal light or spirit and in the same way that twins are each *created* or formed with a distinct soul, the new baby will be infused with its own personality. >> Yep. A sentient being is a sentient being, any way it is created. The morality or advisability of cloning already fully formed humans in an artificial manner, and thus intervening in what heretofore has been a mostly natural process - or what happens to embryos not used - is another issue, I believe, from whether or not a cloned person would have a soul. The last thing we need on this planet is yet another group of people viewed as "second class" or somehow not fully human! Let's assume they have souls; if they do, and we treat them as if they do not, the resulting negative karma would be devastating. My two cents. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:46:29 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: January 29, 1999 In a message dated 1/30/99 12:01:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << (I also sent a longer e-mail on the subject, but this misconception asked also for a smaller reply in my oppinion-education in the States really needs improvement) >> This may be true but I wouldn't recommend generalizing the mistakes of one person to reflect on the education of all Americans. By the way, the English in the above statement could use some improvement... Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 20:32:27 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: clones In a message dated 1/29/99 12:02:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << The point is, regardless of morals it will happen, and how do we handle it? >> I think of cloning as similar to identical twins - only an artificial method is used to produce the clone, whereas identical twins are formed when a single egg is fertilized and then splits into two zygotes, if I recall my biology correctly. (This is different from fraternal twins, who are the result of two eggs being fertilized at the same time, and hence are more akin genetically to siblings than to twins, except in the timing of their birth.) The clone and the original share the same genetic material, just as do identical twins. It seems to me that this is a matter of the physical vehicle, and that both could therefore have souls. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 05:03:39 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 02, 1999 On reading THE SECRET DOCTRINE Feb 3rd. Dear Christine: If you read an "abridged" SECRET DOCTRINE someone has been over it and thus filtered our or selected material they think is valuable. Not everyone agrees that is valuable. Like any truly great Text-Book it may seem difficult to read. If one prepares ones' self with a reading of the KEY TO THEOSOPHY some of the ideas and doctrines of Theosophy will be available as mental furniture to help. The SECRET DOCTRINE provides much more than ISIS UNVEILED DID (published earlier in 1877). The SECRET DOCTRINE gives the basis for the doctrines and then shows how they can be traced in such fragments of records taken from all around the world from the ancient religions and philosophies. In doing this it draws together the many scattered fragments of lore that can help to reconstruct the tattered accounts of pre-history we now call myth, legend, and the imaginings of primitive humanity. It is not an easy read, but it is very interesting for those who discover all that their education had omitted telling them about. It also serves to show what are the links that bridge gaps in what we know of the past. Best wishes, Dallas. PS It is also useful to have a copy of HPB's THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY handy to help with the words taken from oriental and other lands. PPS Re: cloning, blood transfusion, organ transplants - consider that with all these physical transfers, the ASTRAL BODY and the MAGNETIC VITALITY of the person who originates, used, or gives their physical material to another is involved. Karmically, Theosophy would say that they had attracted to them the skandhas ( Life-atoms) which carried their previous Karma. Now they pass their physical and karmic substance on to another - and a forced link is made. What ever the good motive of the donor may be, they cannot purge their psychic imprint from the material they pass on. So a link is forged with some other known, or unknown Ego because of the gift of that material. Who can say what future consequences may result. But there is danger involved in this of which our Science has no knowledge yet. D. ========================= Subject: RE: Astral Body and Clones == Do they have a "model form?" From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 12:39:21 -0500 (EST) X-Message-Number: 2 Feb 3rd Dear Dorothy: How can you think that a physical "clone" would not have an "astral body ?" In all physial forms it is the foundation for that form. One of the functions of the "astral body" is to form a network or a lattice on which the physical molecules can arrange themselves to make a physical form. So minerals, plants, animals and humans, in fact everything in the Universe has first an ASTRAL FORM, and then physical forms of various densities are aggregated around that. Take a good look at the able of Kosmic Principles. Then turn to the KEY and take a good look at those attributed to the Human being. They compare and correspond. Were you thinking of the "astral body" as the Personal soul ? If so, that is an aspect of the Higher Manas which, shoots down and illuminates the physical brain (in the case of man) in a progressive manner from babyhood on, by stages of 7 years, until there is a full incarnation of Manas and full moral responsibility by age 14/21 (for humans). In the case of animals the Manas is latent, and the power of the lower animation poser of nature operations on the principles of the astral, Prana and Kama operate. Instinct is the manifestation in a progressive manner of the gradual trend towards individualization of the animal forms. At least that is what I get from a study of the principles in the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY and the KEY TO THEOSOPHY. There is so much in those which gives us answers when we seek for information. And then it stays with us, as memory. I hope this is of help. Best wishes, Dallas ================================= Subject: Re: clones From: Hazarapet@aol.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 14:44:08 EST X-Message-Number: 3 In a message dated 2/2/99 7:57:06 PM Central Standard Time, Cybercmh@aol.com writes: << << The point is, regardless of morals it will happen, and how do we handle it? >> >> There is nothing special about the case of cloning in relation to morals. Our technology outpaces our ethics because, as a civilization, we invest more in power over nature and/or populations than in ethical evolution. The general question becomes, I think, what do we do with our technology running ahead of our moral wisdom, or to bite Ahriman's monkey's tail, the question is what do we do with ourselves. Grigor Vahan Ananikian Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 02, 1999 From: Cybercmh@aol.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 17:09:22 EST X-Message-Number: 4 In a message dated 2/3/99 12:01:36 AM Eastern Standard Time, Dallas writes: << The value of a "chat" group such as this is that we can share what we discover and by comparison we can secure a greater assurance of accuracy. >> Thank you for your insightful comments, Dallas. I would add to the above that a chat group can also be valuable for helping like-minded persons feel that they are not alone, and thus more at home, in the vast expanse of the Universe. It can sometimes be hard to find others who share one's interests or worldviews, especially if they are a bit unusual, and the Internet provides a way for such people to chat with others who are similarly inclined - whether or not they disagree on the finer points. Christine Subject: RE: Astral Body and Clones = Do they have a "model form?" From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1999 21:45:58 -0500 (EST) X-Message-Number: 5 Feb 3rd 1999 In ISIS UNVEILED Vol. I p. 207 (bottom of page) speaks of flesh and skin grafted onto another person, which fell off when the donor died. This is in regard to universal magnetism and the magnetic relations to be observed between a donor and the material given. A link is apparently maintained. Would this not be through the astral body and the Prana ? Dallas. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 20:40:23 +1300 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 01, 1999 Replying to Christine << a greater ability to empathise with others >> > >I would agree and say this was the greatest gift I received from my own grief >experience(s). I really understand suffering from the "inside" now, not just >in the abstract, and as a result am more understanding of others. It has also >lessened my arrogance - I no longer assume bad things only happen to other >people. Ah, yes, re the gift. My lesson is to realise real deep down, that bad things don't happen just to me. I also need more arrogance in some of the floors of my building, and less in others - just so as to be balanced :-) [Kym wrote] << There have been times, in the past, while > grieving, that I have awoken with the feeling that "something" happened - > something that helped me, something that comforted me, something that told > me all is well. >> > [Christine] >This happens to me in waking moments also. I often think it is my father, >sending caring vibes from beyond. I always like to hear of other people's experiences in these things. I remember once, a few months after my first wife died, having a lovely and quite startling experience while I was quietly sitting reading a book when suddenly, in a kaleidoscopic intrusion into the normal sequence of time, she seemed (her presence felt and seen) to look over my shoulder at the book and make a really chirpy, slightly teasing remark with a hugely cheerful feeling. It seemed to happen really quickly in physical time and was gone almost instantly, but it completely changed my mood. It only ever happened once, but I'm grateful for it to this day. >Interesting distinction. I remember when my father died, I was so terrified >to look into the casket for fear of what I would see and how I would feel. My >heart was pounding when I walked up to it, but I felt it was something I had >to do. Well, to my surprise when I looked in, a wave of relief came over me >and the powerful message, "Your father is not joined to this body anymore. >The person you knew and loved as your father is somewhere good and safe." He >is not *this*, I thought, and was comforted. That's lovely and is another case where, if people take the courage, they are amply repaid. The sight and, better still, touch of a loved one in death, conveys the reality of their being *gone* with an unquestionable finality that sinks into one's physical being and sets the stage for a healthy grief process. I believe people - children included no less - should be allowed and encouraged to be with and touch their dead loved one's body, for this simple healthy reason. Ideas of squeamishness or fear picked up from society one way or the other need to be weeded out of the cultural stream as unhelpful trash, in my opinion. Murray From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 20:56:35 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: reading HPB In a message dated 2/4/99 12:01:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, Dallas writes: << If one prepares ones' self with a reading of the KEY TO THEOSOPHY some of the ideas and doctrines of Theosophy will be available as mental furniture to help. >> Thanks, Dallas, I think I have a copy of this somewhere here. I'll try to fish it out. If you could recommend, say, five books to read initially, and the order in which they should be read, what list would you give? e.g., would it be (1) Key to Theosophy, (2) Secret Doctrine (unabridged), (3) ...? Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 20:40:23 +1300 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 01, 1999 Replying to Christine << a greater ability to empathise with others >> > >I would agree and say this was the greatest gift I received from my own grief >experience(s). I really understand suffering from the "inside" now, not just >in the abstract, and as a result am more understanding of others. It has also >lessened my arrogance - I no longer assume bad things only happen to other >people. Ah, yes, re the gift. My lesson is to realise real deep down, that bad things don't happen just to me. I also need more arrogance in some of the floors of my building, and less in others - just so as to be balanced :-) [Kym wrote] << There have been times, in the past, while > grieving, that I have awoken with the feeling that "something" happened - > something that helped me, something that comforted me, something that told > me all is well. >> > [Christine] >This happens to me in waking moments also. I often think it is my father, >sending caring vibes from beyond. I always like to hear of other people's experiences in these things. I remember once, a few months after my first wife died, having a lovely and quite startling experience while I was quietly sitting reading a book when suddenly, in a kaleidoscopic intrusion into the normal sequence of time, she seemed (her presence felt and seen) to look over my shoulder at the book and make a really chirpy, slightly teasing remark with a hugely cheerful feeling. It seemed to happen really quickly in physical time and was gone almost instantly, but it completely changed my mood. It only ever happened once, but I'm grateful for it to this day. >Interesting distinction. I remember when my father died, I was so terrified >to look into the casket for fear of what I would see and how I would feel. My >heart was pounding when I walked up to it, but I felt it was something I had >to do. Well, to my surprise when I looked in, a wave of relief came over me >and the powerful message, "Your father is not joined to this body anymore. >The person you knew and loved as your father is somewhere good and safe." He >is not *this*, I thought, and was comforted. That's lovely and is another case where, if people take the courage, they are amply repaid. The sight and, better still, touch of a loved one in death, conveys the reality of their being *gone* with an unquestionable finality that sinks into one's physical being and sets the stage for a healthy grief process. I believe people - children included no less - should be allowed and encouraged to be with and touch their dead loved one's body, for this simple healthy reason. Ideas of squeamishness or fear picked up from society one way or the other need to be weeded out of the cultural stream as unhelpful trash, in my opinion. Murray From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:00:15 -0500 From: John E Mead Subject: TEST test msg. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 11:15:08 -0500 From: John E Mead Subject: discussion lists are up (i.e. Lyris at vnet is now up) following just received from vnet. john e. mead Lyris has been restored to working order. New hardware is now in place, and was, at least in the installation process, noticeabally faster. We will be watching closely to see if this fixes our problems. The configurations and archive databases are from post Friday's crash, but pre Monday's identification of the memory leak. Info prior to these troubles should be intact. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 13:33:02 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: TEST Reality is a test. Life a lesson. And while servers have their ups and downs, the virtues of the online life are virtual virtues at best. :-) Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 14:02:19 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Is Brotherhood Unique to Theosophy? == Relations to Jesus' teachings. Feb. 12th 1999 I came across this extract which might be of some help. Dallas. Some views of Mr. Judge may help show how close the practical aspects of Jesus' teachings and Theosophical ethics agree: In Chapter 4 of St. Mathew an account of Jesus being led into the wilderness to be "tempted" by the "devil" is mentioned: "theosophically, the trials of the disciple in the world or wilderness of his own nature" is meant. "The tempter suggests first that bread be made out of stones after the long fast. But Jesus replied: "It is written. Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." After a period of prayer, or aspiration, the mystics in all ages had first to resist the temptation to at once satisfy immediate bodily wants and then on triumphing they receive instruction and benefit from "God" who is the Higher Self. The Higher Self is the god they all, including Jesus, aspired to and spoke of as God and Father. Usually the clash and roar of the lower nature prevents the words or "voice" of that Father from being heard. Shakespeare knew the value of fasting to release the inner for he said that when the bodily encasement was reduced the inner self came forth more easily. And here Jesus is only repeating what all the schools of real occultism teach, that is, that the real man has his own appropriate food, or the communion with the Monad which is not perfectly conscious on this plane, but must be sought for in its own proper habitation. The "devil" took him to a high place suggesting that he throw himself down and be saved by angels, to which Jesus replied: "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God." This could not mean that he adjured Satan not to tempt him-his God-but rather that it was neither common sense nor the act of an occultist to show his powers for no end but vanity. This is one of the rules of the Lodge, that if you have occult power you shall not use it except for the benefit of others. The Sermon on the Mount is of high importance theosophically. If taken literally, it is a string of meaningless promises which are broken every day, but adding Karma and Reincarnation they are the old declarations of all great teachers and holy books prior to the alleged time of Jesus. The first beatitude, that the poor in spirit will have heaven is that which was always taught as the result of humility. For only when the personal self is thoroughly eliminated, and the idea of separateness is destroyed by that of universal brotherhood, does the illumination from within desired by all earnest students come to one. Many neglect this injunction being carried away by scientific phases or having personal ends. One need not be a "Christian" to see and accept this injunction of Jesus since it was only repeated as of old by him; carried on, as Confucius did his ideas. {Copied from archives of the T. S. from notes in Mr. Judge's handwriting.) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:03:31 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Next Millenium Finally the Lyris Server is up and running and Bill Clinton's impeachment also ended. As we approach the end of this century and go into the next century, can we look into the future. What is in store for theosophy - Divine Wisdom? As the improvement of the conditions of the suffering Humanity is all important -- even from a "selfish" point of view all of us have our own suffering/problems -- as we are part the Humanity, the question is what can we do? It is nice to talk and have intellectual discussions about the manvantaras, globes, chains, root-races, future races, higher planes, chakras, clairvoyance, meditation, "the Path" etc., to the man/woman in the street who is in the middle of his problems, all these are simple theories and is not of interest. Is it possible to do something that would "help" the common/man? If all the knowledge the theosophy has presented cannot translate into practical applications which have immediate impact, theosophy may become just another set of theories which some may choose to "believe", until again another messenger comes along makes an entirely new effort to re-present it. Any thoughts? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 16:09:02 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Next Millenium At last, Lyris Server is up and running. Bill Clinton's impeachment also ended. We are witness to an important historic event, at least in the USA. As we approach the end of this century and go into the next century, can we look into the future. What is in store for theosophy - Divine Wisdom? As the improvement of the conditions of the suffering Humanity is all important -- even from a "selfish" point of view all of us have our own suffering/problems -- as we are part the Humanity, the question is what can we do? It is nice to talk and have intellectual discussions about the manvantaras, globes, chains, root-races, future races, higher planes, chakras, clairvoyance, meditation, "the Path" etc., to the man/woman in the street who is in the middle of his problems, all these are simple theories and is not of interest. Is it possible to do something that would "help" the common/man? If all the knowledge the theosophy has presented cannot translate into practical applications which have immediate impact, theosophy may become just another set of theories which some may choose to "believe", until again another messenger comes along makes an entirely new effort to re-present it. Any thoughts? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:10:02 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: coincidences and equivalences Dear Liu, In light of the recent troubles of this list, I will reproduce your letter in its entirety. Grigor In a message dated 2/6/99 10:40:31 AM Central Standard Time, Liu I Ming writes: << Subj: Re: coincidences and equivalences Date: 2/6/99 10:40:31 AM Central Standard Time From: Liu I Ming To: Hazarapet CC: theos-l@list.vnet.net Dear Grigor, I am so glad to have made contact with you again. The thing I still find under-emphasized in the contemporary spiritual search of so many is a profound lack of awareness that this process of inner evolution or inner alchemy is advanced ethics. As you know, HPB said that theosophy was advanced ethics, that one had to be morally serious about the path, and that the whole thing involved a radical transformation of the human motivational structure which was the creation of the body of immortality where the hun identifies with the shen and disidentifies with the p'o through the process of the white tiger and green dragon. There are so many chi kung practitioners/teachers that do not know the primary motive or purpose which is the exclusive basis for the inner evolution of the human to supra-human transmutation to even succeed. Liu >> Dear Liu, I know what you mean. I have found that many register surprise when they hear a detailed introduction to the human constitution. There is seven valid means of different kinds of knowledge in the Indian tradition as well as the Zoroastrian tradition. These are perception (pratyaksa, which is external in the five senses, external and internal in conscience, and internal and partakes primarily of buddhi), inference/logic (anumana, which is primarily manas operation with buddhi support - as you you, the Buddhists classify all except perception and conscience as anumana), verbal testimony from reliable sources (sabda, if the Word of revelation, i.e. sruti or agama), analogical comparison or metaphor (upamana), hypothesis formulation and testing (arthapatti), and apprehension of nonexistence (anupalabdhi). Then they are surprised when the seventh and highest kind of knowledge (pramana) and valid means of cognition (karana or indriya) is conscience. As it says in the Mahabharata, conscience is the seventh form of perceptual intuitive knowledge (indriya). Or, in the direct intuitive-insightful perceptual (buddhi) and logical-inferential-conceptual (manas) search for the highest knowledge of reality, Kumarila, commenting on Kalidasa's point, says in his Sakuntalam, and you know the high regard HPB held for this treatise, "satam hi samdeha-padesu vastusu pramanam antakarana pravrttayah" or "to the goodly/wise, conscience is the sure guide in all matters of doubt." (also see, Tantra-varttika. I. iii. 7). So, it is the measure of truth. If a belief conflicts with conscience, it must be false. And, further, that conscience is the true microcosm in the person, the true basis of self-knowledge (atma-vidya) of the I (aham), and true self-affirmation (atma-tusti) as opposed to egotistical affirmation that has a bad conscience in the commentary on the Law of Manu (ii. 6, 223, iv 161, and vi 46) where Manu says that just like there is the administration of justice leading to the development of society in a court of law, so there is the inner mentor in every human who is the true inner teacher and guru by who outlines and guides the true path of inner development of the individual. This is the inner sabda (Revealed Word or logos) and sruti (revelation). In Zoroastrianism, or the Mazdayasna i Zarathustri, this inner guide is of course the daena or den as one's higher twin/consort who is one's inner illumination, revelation, and teacher (and higher celestial self). In Tibetan Buddhism, this is the seed of the bodhi mind that is also the Prajna of a Dhyani Buddha (who is the upaya manifesting and working out prajna) and who manifests in the Bardo in the Judgment Scene in King Yama's court as the good or bad genius that bears witness. Course you're better on the Tibetan than me. While some will go "ah ha!" because on hearing this they suddenly recognize a lost piece of the puzzle or lost key, others initially try to deny it until overwhelmed by the preponderance of the evidence such as the quotes from authoritative sources like above. Frankly, in either case, I don't know what some of these surprised "seekers" think spirituality is about if they didn't know it was, as you say, "advanced ethics." I wonder what they think phrases like 'death of the ego" and the like mean if it isn't ethical. I suspect some kind of subtle egoism or narcissism is involved just as the ancient Chinese saying of your school put it, "if the wrong man (i.e. one with wrong motive and wrong understanding) uses the right means, the right means works in the wrong way." I suspect those who go "aha" are more sincere than those, especially Americans, who seek an exotic belief system because they are running away not just from the unfortunate dogmatism of dead western religions but also from morality. Anyway, the battle continues against pseudo-spirituality. Glad to know you are still around. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:20:59 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Next Millenium In a message dated 2/12/99 4:04:13 PM Central Standard Time, ramadoss@eden.com writes: << f all the knowledge the theosophy has presented cannot translate into practical applications which have immediate impact, theosophy may become just another set of theories which some may choose to "believe", until again another messenger comes along makes an entirely new effort to re-present it. Any thoughts? mkr >> Yes, theosophists seem to be getting too bookish and not practical. Many talk of buddhi. Their words betray them. They talk through their hats. Its like a virgin trying to pose as an experienced or salted person amongst very salty persons. Or, one who has read a lot on physics, yet hasn't done any, passing himself off as a physicist to someone (that he doesn't know is a physicist who quickly sees the fraud). Theosophists are either ordinary people with the same problems (and of no special help) or they have undergone a deep practical line of spiritual work. All this is leading up to this comment. The best way to help people is to help yourself. Someone who wants to heal people has to become a trained physician first. Grigor Vahan Ananikian From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 18:11:31 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: coincidences and equivalences In a message dated 2/5/99 1:52:07 PM Central Standard Time, Hazarapet@aol.com writes: << Subj: Re: coincidences and equivalences Date: 2/5/99 1:52:07 PM Central Standard Time From: Hazarapet@aol.com Reply-to: theos-l@list.vnet.net (Theosophy Study List) To: theos-l@list.vnet.net (Theosophy Study List) CC: theos-l@list.vnet.net Dear Sir, Yes, I'm that Grigor. I would hesitate to make any fast equivalences between Egyptian beliefs and theosophical ones. They are not an exact match. For example, there are five gross physical bodies according to the ancient Egyptians. As a group, they are the little earth. As such, they are the khat. Roughly, khat = sthula sarira. The ba is the generic vital soul with no individuality and is roughly the pranamayakosa of the sthula sarira. The ba is neither astral nor manic. This is that part that belongs to RA. The rest belongs to Osiris. Instead, it is the Khaibat which is roughly equivalent to the manomayakosa and vijnanamayakosa that together make up the suksma sarira. Now, the buddhi- manas complex of the antakarana and aham is roughly what the Egyptians meant by the ka. The ka is not, as you tried to guess, the real self. Like you Taoists and the Tibetan Tantrists, the ancient Egyptians affirmed we are not born with a causal body of deified immortality, but rather, are born with the potential to create one. This god-body that we create is the sah or sahu. It is created when the I component of the ka or ordinary self becomes free of the animals of the five bodily circuits of the ba and realizes itself to be the spiritual self or true I which the Egyptians called the khu. Now, the clue to the nature of this process and of having a causal body at all is revealed in the appelation that the Egyptians gave to both one who has become his khu and has won his sah. That appelation is sekhem. It means self- mastery. On the Egyptian view, the causal body is nothing but self-mastery over all ones lower manifestations. Its very substance is sekhem. G. V. A --- You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: hazarapet@aol.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: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 02:21:28 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: A new Theosophical Study group - internactive - on THE SECRET DOCTRINE Feb 13th 1999 Dear friends If you wish to sample something truly interesting, theosophically, go to: http://www.blavatsky net. And subscribe as a member to their discussion group on the Secret Doctrine. Watch for a while the interplay of contributions and questions. I think you will find it interesting and refreshing. Dal **************************************** From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 03:28:26 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 12, 1999 Feb 13th 1999 Dear Doss: Your observations are so valuable as usual. If you wish to see something truly interesting, theosophically go to http://www.blavatsky net. And subscribe as a member to their discussion group on the Secret Doctrine. Watch for a while the interplay of contributions and questions. I think you will find it interesting. Dal **************************************** From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 07:41:20 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 12, 1999 Dallas: As usual, your encouragement is welcome. Will try to visit the site and thediscussion going on on SD. ....mkr "W. Dallas TenBroeck" wrote: > Feb 13th 1999 > > Dear Doss: > > Your observations are so valuable as usual. > > If you wish to see something truly interesting, theosophically go > to > > http://www.blavatsky net. And subscribe as a member to their > discussion group on the Secret Doctrine. Watch for a while the > interplay of contributions and questions. > > I think you will find it interesting. > > Dal From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 00:28:37 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Public Morality Here is a wise quote: "A leader can be sexually pure but lack public morality," declares Hart, in the piece set for prime real estate in Monday's NEW YORK TIMES. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 02:02:53 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Public Morality In a message dated 99-02-15 01:32:18 EST, you write: << "A leader can be sexually pure but lack public morality," declares Hart, in the piece set for prime real estate in Monday's NEW YORK TIMES. mkr >> "The only sex scandal that can hurt me would be if they found me in bed with a dead woman or a live boy." Governor Edwards of Louisiana in response to the Gary Hart embarrassment some years ago. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 08:31:22 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Public Morality In a message dated 2/15/99 1:04:20 AM Central Standard Time, Drpsionic@aol.com writes: << "The only sex scandal that can hurt me would be if they found me in bed with a dead woman or a live boy." Governor Edwards of Louisiana in response to the Gary Hart embarrassment some years ago. Chuck the Heretic >> So he would not be bothered by being caught with a duck, chicken, monkey, horse, pig, a dead boy, or various detached body parts? :-) G.V.A. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 12:02:04 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Public Morality In a message dated 99-02-15 08:32:47 EST, you write: << So he would not be bothered by being caught with a duck, chicken, monkey, horse, pig, a dead boy, or various detached body parts? :-) G.V.A. >> I don't know. You'd have to ask him. On the other hand, he probably eats duck, chicken and pork. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 13:12:33 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Public Morality In a message dated 2/15/99 11:02:35 AM Central Standard Time, Drpsionic@aol.com writes: << I don't know. You'd have to ask him. >> No thank you. I don't go around asking people what they sexually like unless they are becoming a partner. And politicians always make strange bedfellows. I avoid them like the plague. G.V.A From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 13:13:41 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: Public Morality In a message dated 2/15/99 11:02:35 AM Central Standard Time, Drpsionic@aol.com writes: << On the other hand, he probably eats duck, chicken and pork. >> Yes, and in the form of various detached body parts. :-) G.V.A From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 03:22:33 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Announcement - Krishnamurti Mailinglist in French > From: Dirk Lutzebaeck > Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 11:16:35 +0100 (CET) > To: listening-l@zrz.tu-berlin.de, kft@brockwood.org.uk, kfa@kfa.org, > kfihq@md2.vsnl.net.in, Hollstein.Bernd@t-online.de, > dagmar@brockwood.org.uk, barbier@univ-paris8.fr > Cc: debat-l@zrz.tu-berlin.de > Subject: ANNOUNCE: mailing list debat-l in french language created > Sender: listening-l-owner@zrz.tu-berlin.de Friends, five years after the creation of listening-l there is a new list on the same interest exclusively in french language called debat-l. Don't wonder about the name, it seems to have some different meaning in french. The list is also administered with kindness at TU Berlin in Germany but please send all questions in french to Fr=E9d=E9ric FLEURI who founded the list. To subscribe please send an email with 'subscribe debat-l' in the body to and please follow the instructions. Dirk Here is the intro of the list in french: Krishnamurti - son nom n'a rien =E0 voir avec la secte de Krishna - est un philosophe, un psychologue, un =E9ducateur, un ma=EEtre spirituel la=EFc et un sage indien du XX=E8me si=E8cle, aux id=E9es particuli=E8rement originales. Bien que mort depuis 1986, son rayonnement ne cesse de grandir dans le monde entier gr=E2ce aux =E9coles qu'il a fond=E9es en Inde , en Grande Bretagne et aux Etats-Unis, au souvenir qu'il a laiss=E9 =E0 ceux qui l'ont fr=E9quent=E9 ou simplement lu et gr=E2ce =E0 son approche extr=EAmement neuve des probl=E8mes de notre temps. Pourquoi chercher =E0 constituer une liste autour de son enseignement puisque Krishnamurti nous dit que la v=E9rit=E9 est en nous et qu'il fustige les organisations ? Nous pensons qu'une mailing-list n'est pas une organisation, c'est un simple moyen de communication moderne au m=EAme titre que le t=E9l=E9phone ou le visiophone. La communication =E9crite nous para=EEt peut-=EAtre m=EAme plus r=E9fl=E9chi= e que la communication verbale : lorsque qu'une affirmation nous est donn=E9e, chacun a la possibilit=E9 d'en contr=F4ler la pertinence. C'est d'ailleurs Krishnamurti lui-m=EAme qui exhorte ceux qui veulent vra=EEment comprendre =E0 marcher ensemble avec une plus grande ardeur : Cette v=E9ritable compr=E9hension permettra une v=E9ritable amiti=E9 ... d'o=F9 na=EEtra une v=E9ritable coop=E9ration entre nous.>> Dans une mailing-list il n'y a pas de gourou, pas de chef =E0 suivre. La libert=E9 de chacun est totale. Nous devons veiller =E0 ce que le respect des opinions de chacun soit absolu. Nous pensons que Krishnamurti qui, quelques jours avant sa mort se tenait au courant de l'=E9volution des ordinateurs, du g=E9nie g=E9n=E9tique et de l'interaction de l'un sur l'autre, aurait compris que la mailing-list =E9tait un excellent moyen de communication pouvant favoriser les bienfaits du travail en commun. --------- Aide pour s'inscrire au syst=E8me automatique MAJORDOMO Ce syst=E8me automatique permet =E0 chaque utilisateur de s'inscrire et d'annuler son inscription quand il le d=E9sire. L'adresse est: Majordomo@zrz.TU-Berlin.DE Pour s'adresser au syst=E8me, il faut : - ne rien inscrire dans l'espace "sujet" - ne pas signer - utiliser les commandes suivantes (=E0 raison d'une commande par ligne): 1. Souscrire =E0 la liste debat-l Pour souscrire =E0 debat-list envoyez la commande suivante =E0 Majordomo: subscribe debat-l Si pour une raison ou une autre, vous d=E9sirez que les messages soient envoy=E9s =E0 une adresse diff=E9rente de la v=F4tre (celle d'un ami par= exemple) ajouter cette adresse =E0 votre commande, par exemple subscribe debat-l jp.public@wanadoo.fr 2. Annuler l'inscription Ecrire =E0 Majordomo la commande : unsubscribe debat-l 3. Pour savoir =E0 quelles listes vous vous =EAtes inscrit Adresser =E0 Majordomo la commande : which 4. Pour recevoir le message d'aide complet Ecrivez dans l'espace message la commande : help 5. Problems From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:52:48 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: language > but lists can vary in quality time to time. There is another one > that is divisive open flame war on nature of love. One who remarked on the > paradox of how much divisiveness and venomous hate the topic of love generated > became cause of unity on board, albeit not a unity in spirit of love, but more > like undivided spite of dunked cat. I don't know if it was that bad, but a simple misunderstanding grew out into people assuming I deliberately talked down on them. The fact is that I am a teacher (math & chemistry) so I am used to try and help people understand things better. But now the effort was not appreciated at all, in fact it was interpreted as an insult. And only because the person did not in fact misunderstand, so I was answering a question that did not exist. Perhaps I should become less inclined to help? How is that for a theosophist, or a person trying to be one? No, I will continue to try and explain when I think I have a relevant answer or comment. Perhaps my skin needs to become more like one from an elephant. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 12:58:13 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: mammals, races, rounds hi, Grigor writes: > Any arbitrarily chosen pair of humans only genetically differ by 2%. So, as > MDs know, often a black donor, for example, is a closer match for a white > recipient than any of the white persons relatives. Race is only skin deep. > > With higher primates, the genetic spread is between 5-10% (I remember not > exactly) in relation to humans. So, in emergency situations, where human > blood is not available, chimp blood has been and can be used (chimps have no > typing but all have the universal donor type). > > But, I see not how physical proximity bears on spiritual proximity question, > especially in light of idea of root-races, which at least, indicates same > biological type (even relatives) may be of different spiritual race or be of > greater distance. I don't know either. You are probably right. My thoughts on the subject are only just starting to develop. There seems to be more Spiritual proximity between people amongst themselves than there is spiritual proximity between people and mammals? On account of manas? The whole races and rounds issue is very puzzling. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 13:03:05 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: theos-l digest/cloning/AI > Yes, but cloning is not main place where efforts to create new labor class are > to be found. There is push in AI (artificial intelligence) branch of computer > science. There is low AI (creating robotic machines that are computer > controlled) and high AI (creating human-like intelligence). This raises > deeper issues. If made, will such totally artificial human-machine have soul? > Will it be person or property? Is such even possible? The flipside of these > questions is a scary, materialist, and quasi-fascist implication. It is > already raised in computer science, cognitive science, and engineering. If > these artificial intelligences are not persons, but despite appearances, are > only a special form of non-life that appears to be life (silicon-based), then > are humans also only a wierd form of non-life (carbon-based) not entitled to > any special status or rights? What I know of AI, is mostly that it is surrounded by a lot of publicity and hype, but that it is not very successfull. The recreating of even the simple skill of a bug, to walk around, takes so much energy, that I am not personally worried that a conscious being, capable of making choices for itself, is in the pipeline any time soon. That seems to me the criteria we would have to worry about. Can a conscious being make choices, than it should be allowed that freedom, if those choices do not interfere with the freedom of other conscious beings. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:14:49 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest/cloning/AI In a message dated 2/19/99 6:03:26 AM Central Standard Time, hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: << What I know of AI, is mostly that it is surrounded by a lot of publicity and hype, but that it is not very successfull. The recreating of even the simple skill of a bug, to walk around, takes so much energy, that I am not personally worried that a conscious being, capable of making choices for itself, is in the pipeline any time soon. >> I agree with this too. I see not much technical realizability in project. But it social/cultural/political message in the publicity is big concern. G.V.A. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 06:53:54 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 19, 1999 Why do we seem to repel others by our attitudes ? Feb 20th Dear Friend K - - - : The desire to teach is sometimes presented over-enthusiastically. We all have it as a soul urging to express what we feel to be true. Sometimes our wish to help can overwhelm both us and others. It may seem to others that we desire to discipline them into thinking or behaving as we would do - a kind of regimentation. This produces either a resentment or a submission. The natural independence of the spirit has to be evoked, I think, by asking questions that lead to self-reflection. But why is there in each human such a "spirit of independence?" What is the nature of "man?" What is the power of the "mind?" If we are, in effect, mirrors of the infinite Self, then in our limited minds we have to develop a view of the potential and then the actual knowledge that is internal. I say this because if the Universal Principle of ALL is "universal" then each of us has the same potentials and powers of observation, reasoning and learning. How can we get people to look inside and to trust their own powers of reasoning, when they are seen to be swayed by desires? It is a great puzzle: how to be a good teacher of anything. We can point to principles, which if true, are universal. Can we lead pupils to seek for the wisdom that is interior? I think that the greatest barrier is the one which integrates these two great factors: Our desire to learn and our desire to be lazy. WE all have minds but we do not all desire to use them fully. The problem to me then is: how do we discipline our desires ? What shall we adopt as the best in the long run? This drives me, the enquirer, to ask which (or who) is the Controller in me: the Mind, or the desires? But I see that I can direct the mind and I can subdue my desires. So the "I" in me is different from either mind or desires. The "Mind" I use as a tool. I can blunt it or sharpen it. The desires are confusing and often an impediment. They are most difficult to confront and control. I ask myself: which are valuable and which are self-destructive? How do I get to isolate and examine "desire" using the "mind?" Most desire a formula or a rite or something that another has devised, so they can either memorize it without reason, or, if misapplied, they can blame the teacher for. Few realize that with knowledge also comes responsibility. The fact of "responsibility" or "duty" frightens or annoys many. Why should that be so? The great problem as I see it, is that we, who have some knowledge of the operations of Nature that integrate all these questions and problems, have to lead slowly, providing the information that is essential. In a school or academy in our present world, as a teacher, with a curriculum to complete in a set time, the pupils have to be encouraged to learn (actually, to remember) those formulas which they can use to solve examples and exercises set to enforce those theorems. In life we find that there is no such discipline or time-agenda. If we want to laze or divert ourselves, we can do so. If we wish to live disciplined or inquisitive lives, we can do that also. There are a million ways in which anyone can direct their living. But, is there a certain optimum? And if so, how do we define it, and how do we practice living in that direction? In mathematics there is no leeway between the true answer and all the errors. In logic it is a little more obscure, because the matter of sentiment arises, and a question of liking or disliking an answer that we arrive at, internally, may prevent us from arriving at a universally and true result. Some results are unpleasant to our "desire nature." What shall we do? Remain ignorant and happy, or try to be come wise and in the meantime discipline our desires and channel them into the disciplines that lead to a knowledge of the true? For some this is easier than for others. But, everyone has the freedom to make up their own mind, ultimately, regardless of how others think they ought to behave. In Theosophy, as in all philosophical systems, there is the problem of basis. How do we establish a basis that is fair and just and true as well as useful? How do we test it? If it is UNIVERSAL and open to all to seek for verification, the answers are more likely to be true. Theosophy claims to be a record or a report on the "wisdom of the Ages." It has no curriculum outside of our own living. It looks at all aspects of individual and collective life. It inquires into motive, into the power of thought into the results fanciful or real of desire, etc... It does not give rites, rotes, or formulas. It encourages a study of all the ways and laws of nature and a search for the best way to apply them to ourselves as members of the world community of interactive agents. So the basis is (for most) a "belief" about GOD. Is it a UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE, or is it a He, a She or an all-powerful whimsical being that enjoys being praised and gives or withholds with neither rime nor reason? Does one religion or system give better protection or assistance over others? Is it a refuge for thinkers or for hopeful believers who are forever unsure? How do we test the rites, creeds, dogmas and observances of any or all religions? Do they encourage us to do this? Or, do they discourage such search? Next: are there rules and laws in the Universe for mathematics, Science in all its many departments where various aspects of Nature are studied? Are those rules invariable or are the constantly changeable? Is our pursuit of knowledge a matter of temperament or a capacity that all have in various degrees? If there are impediments to such a desire, what are they? Is the evolution of: 1. the bodily form, 2. the emotional nature, and 3. the mind, subject to rules and laws (ethics, morals)? And if so, how are they to be defined, and applications made universally fair and just for all? Do the "rich" have more in their favor than the "poor?" If so, why? Should the "poor" apply unethical methods to become powerful? Is ethics a science? Does psychology, as at present taught, in our academies a complete answer? Does ease, happiness, contentment, etc... depend on an inner attitude or the acquisition of the power to purchase them? Does Theosophy present answers to these questions? If so where, and how do we verify them? These are some of the questions that have puzzled me for many years. I have found some of them that seem to satisfy me, but, when I present them, I do not find that everyone is eager to listen or talk about them. So I am a constant "seeker for truth." It is quite rare, but always rewarding to find others engaged in the same timeless search. In spite of many disappointments and discouragements, if we persevere in dong the best we can we need not worry about how others react. There is a need for weighing all those who approve against those who do not. Then to find out in what areas that disapproval is shown. Following that, we need to ask ourselves if we (our methods of presentation, our attitude), or the subject of study, has caused that difference. Then: How do we make a bridge to draw objectors in to seeing our point of view rather than our resenting their views as such. Can we put ourselves figuratively in their place and look at ourselves with their vision? I wonder if this is of any help to you and the questions and observations you offer? Best wishes to you, Dallas * * * * * * * * * * * ORIGINAL MESSAGE I don't know if it was that bad, but a simple misunderstanding grew out into people assuming I deliberately talked down on them. The fact is that I am a teacher (math & chemistry) so I am used to try and help people understand things better. But now the effort was not appreciated at all, in fact it was interpreted as an insult. And only because the person did not in fact misunderstand, so I was answering a question that did not exist. Perhaps I should become less inclined to help? How is that for a theosophist, or a person trying to be one? No, I will continue to try and explain when I think I have a relevant answer or comment. Perhaps my skin needs to become more like one from an elephant. - - - - - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 08:34:05 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 19, 1999 Why do we seem to repel others by our ... In a message dated 2/20/99 7:55:04 AM Central Standard Time, dalval@nwc.net writes: << The desire to teach is sometimes presented over-enthusiastically. We all have it as a soul urging to express what we feel to be true. Sometimes our wish to help can overwhelm both us and others. >> Sorry but this seems like inaccurate statement. It seems like half apology and half self-justification wrapped up in Theosophical cosmic flag. Salute! More honestly, such desire to "teach" most often subtle egoism. Base of egoism is not greed or selfishness. It is need to be cosmic center of things, the meaning of it all, and most valuable "see me," "see me," and "pay attention to me." It is need for "guru of the millenium award with oak leaf clusters," a new Masonic degree invented in one's honor, and a limo or two driven. Unfortunately, humans in this age so exposed to bullcrap, they have heightened sense of smell for what should repel them in others but not in self. As HPB put it, practical Theosophy is super-ethics for those able to take on rigors of esoteric section. And one of first steps to self-knowledge is self honesty or sincerity with oneself. Or is to develop sense of smell for one's own bullcrap. Maya most powerful when about one's illusions about oneself. Just a thought. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 07:47:55 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 19, 1999 Why do we seem to repel others, PS... I see I was not completely clear in last post because the original post was directed to Katrina. My reflections were in no wise directed to Katrina. I don't think she is the "teachy, preachy" one. G.V.A From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 05:56:04 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: February 22, 1999 Feb 23 1999 Dallas responds: Dear Grigor: If the desire to teach is to secure "personal recognition," you would be certainly right in characterizing the motive as selfish, and as directing attention to ones' self as an "authority." However in writing as I did, I was trying to convey the duty (as I see it) of spreading information that might be useful to others. No more than that. You are also quite right in questioning this, as no one should set ones' self up as "teacher," when all of us are in the position of only being "student-teachers" whenever we pass information on to others. No one can secure a "patent" on wisdom or knowledge. To hold information away from others for personal profit, is in my opinion destructive to the integrity of a human being. And that is all the more so when that information could be used for the general good. There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives information to the "wrong" person. Such matters are not easy to decide, nor should they be done hastily. That is as I see it. Dallas