Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00174)

Brenda S. Tucker wrote:
>
> Does this "side by side" refer to the globe next to us?

No. What I meant was that there are cats and dogs, birds and cows,
elephants, bugs, fish and sheep, etc. all on planet Earth, living "side
by side" with man, sometimes in our homes or in the woods, the
mountains, jungles, etc. You know, like "Mutual of Omaha's Wild
Kingdom."

> You probably don't know, but I've read the textbook stuff and there are
> lots of unanswered questions from reading it.

That's exactly my point. Even with the best study and understanding of
all the published theosophy books, the Masters and Blavatsky admit that
they've only told us or been able to tell us just so much. Further, that
they themselves only know so much. The knowledge base is incomplete and
relative to what they didn't or couldn't say (the still unknown.)

> I'm trying to tell you some
> of my thoughts on the subject because what good is solving riddles without
> using it for some beneficial purpose.

I appreciate your effort, Brenda and your good intentions.

> Can you explain why the second and
> the sixth races are androgynous?

As I understand it, and speaking of this 4th round on this planet Earth
(globe D): the first, second and the early part of the third root race
of man were androgynous. I believe they were so because it is the nature
of the Monad and the Causal Ego to be a polar whole and at these periods
of man's development it was not necessary yet for the division into two
distinct sexes.

Likewise, I understand that at some point in the future development of
the human kingdom, it will become no longer necessary to live divided
into two sexes. We'll have become more expressive of the true nature of
the Monad and the Causal Ego and we'll start to see people progress and
incarnate into bodies with an evolved state of androgyy. I understand
that this will happen gradually and take place over a long period of
time.

Rudolph Steiner in his book "Cosmic History" gives a good explanation of
why the division was evolutionarily necessary.

> My explanation is that during the overlap
> of one kingdom with the next, the process of materialization in one and
> spiritualization in the next is a mutually beneficial one.

What overlap, when? I don't follow.

> Would you like to be the one who
> suddenly developed a method of understanding our textbook material that was
> totally different from anything you had read before, but somehow allowed
> little pieces of the puzzle to fit more precisely and more usefully than
> before? What would you do? Wouldn't you try to let people know of this
> discovery? You have to start small. Tell one person, then two, write
> letters, look at reactions. My estimation is that it may take about 10
> years before anyone qualified to really paint a picture of this phenomena
> has both the audience and the expertise to do so. Believe me, Mark, my
> shock at this uncovering was great. I didn't sit around and lightly brush
> it off. I decided to be patient for about 10 years and let nature take its
> course. I decided that anything I might think of to do would be full of
> errors, but if I let the ascended masters be the ones to act, there might
> be a chance for this idea to surface in our theosophical literature.

Why don't you try writing about it yourself? How else were you expecting
it to "surface" in Theosophical litereature? You know, take "independant
action vis-a-vis hierarchy."

> I don't need to hear all of the old standard phrases unless there is really
> a conflict to the material and I don't think there is.

There may not be, but if you are going to try to talk about your
material with theosophists, it will be important to put it in the
context they understand, no?

> Animals could still
> individualize into humans, only it might be during their seventh race,
> which would be when materially they had split with the dual man-animal
> sixth race, and their angelic sishta forms were present on earth, while
> their dinosaur progressed soul hovered over and above the physical globe.
> What's the difference? If it can be that way in the 1st race, why not in
> the seventh?

The "closing of the door" to the human kingdom is said to be a general
rule, but that there are occasionally exceptions to it during the rest
of the course of the rounds of this Chain.

What is the dual man-animal sixth race you speak of? The sixth root
race, (I thought they haven't incarnated yet?) What is a "dinosaur
progressed soul?" I don't quite know what you're talking about. Where
are you getting this?

> When we have spoken of animals in the past, we have always understood that
> to mean one thing, that with which we are familiar through contact with our
> senses. But if it were possible that animals could be "king" of their own
> globe and go through a process very similar to ours upon entering a globe
> through the vegetables, descending through the vegetables while being
> instrumental to their ascent, and then spending a time in material
> existence before going through a period of ascent through man's descent,
> this would be a very much clearer picture of the division in the seven
> races and it would help us to understand our future relationship with adepts.

Again, I'm sorry, but I don't follow you. The way I've been taught to
understand these cycles seems different from the way you talk about it.
Are you trying to better understand the varied relationships between the
Hierarchy of Compassion and Humanity?

> Look at Paul Johnson's book for instance. The ascended masters could be
> present and influence dozens, even hundreds and thousands of humans at one
> particular time. How could anyone choose just one individual with one
> certain name and say that was Kuthumi and that was Morya? They could be
> manifesting simultaneously through several. What is an etheric, floating
> body? Could a portion of it be sent forth, like light, manifest the master
> in its entirety or in part through a human being and then return to the sum
> total when that period of manifestation is successfully completed?

Such instances of bi-location are said to be possible to certain Adepts.
I understood that the Mahatmas HPB knew (M and K.H.) were supposedly
still physically incarnate at the time she knew them. If you are talking
about the overshadowing of someone (like a disciple), by a higher being,
or the "stepping aside" of that disciple so that the higher being can
take over their body and lower principles, that is another thing, but
not unknown to occultism, whether that higher being is a master, angel,
adept, bodhisattva, cosmic being or your own higher self or monad. But
isn't the anchor to and grounding in your own I AM Presence preferable
for your overall progress?

I remember a zen monk saying once that you should sit there and keep
sitting there until one of you, either you or your image of god, went
away.

Mark
--------
WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space
http://www.withoutwalls.com
E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com