Theos-Talk Archives (March 1998 Message tt00156)

Mar 18th

Dear Pat:		[ looking at all your postings, may I say in general:

Thanks for detailed answers.  In defense of Phillips, and the rest of
us, perhaps some of us are short on time and offer briefly some line
that they had profited from.

In general:  "Laws" whether called exoteric (public) or esoteric
("secret") exist and seem to run in and through everything that is in
existence.  Where did they come from ?  Are we creatures or are we
CREATIVE ?

Since we are able to act and think independently, we  would seem to
have links to ALL that is in existence as well as all that is
"secret" also -- although we may not presently know those things in
our "brain-mind" we should be able to discover them.

Take as a beginning that the Universe operates under exact, fair, and
helpful LAWS.  If it did not, we would not be here, nor could we ask
questions. Why are we connected to it ?

Therefore there can be no GOD (an all-powerful whimsical Being,
existing both inside and outside of the Universe) that can be
unfairly invoked to get out of our troubles (self-created, not well)
-- and which would allow us to "escape the due results of our 'sins'"
while our 'victim' continue to suffer from the injustices we
perpetuated and imposed on them !  Not fair, say I.   "Confession" is
nonsense if made to another, and if no attempt to redress the wrongs
we innately acknowledge exist, ourselves.  Are we cowards ?  Is
organized religion designed to perpetuate the dependence of the
ignorant on the crafty ?  If the priesthood had the powers they
claim, then why is there iniquity ?  If they have the ear of God,
then why is our word situation and our individual relations with
others so out of kilter ?  Why do we even think of such things,
unless there is, deep inside a Monitor that notes and warns ? And, if
that is so, why is it shunned ?

LAW and LAWS are the one fair and just (therefore merciful) basis for
all life.  If we consider what Science has discovered by
investigating Nature (I mean those aspects of science that
investigate facts as they are to be found already existing in
NATURE--our UNIVERSE and WORLD) we know that the exchange of living
atoms is universal, but Science has so far not identified the CAUSE
for this, nor all the interactive paths whereby atoms come and go.
They have posited that atoms are immortal and perpetually acting
beings -- and apparently now recognize that they have a "will of
their own."  How did they get this ?  And, Why ?  Is it by chance
that under the impulse of general evolution the ever-existing life in
an 'atom' can graduate through all the types of experience that
Nature offers, and become eventually a man of mind and thought ?
{Theosophy hints at this idea.  You will find it in THE SECRET
DOCTRINE, for instance, but it takes looking for. }

In regard to "consciousness," or 'intelligence,' this is also an
indefinite.  Its effects are recognized but remain largely undefined
either physiologically or psychologically.  The concept that thought
arises from molecular action in the brain is sheer nonsense, as it
does not answer the more basic question:  " What causes a 'thought?'
'What causes brain
action ?'  "What gives us a sense of identity or "I am I" ?"

Those are questions that Theosophy (not the system that HPB brought
to the attention of the world 115 years back or so) but the age-old
system she speaks of in the SECRET DOCTRINE, Vol. 1, pp. 272-3.  So
antique that its professors and students have been in the world-wide
college of the study of Nature since man became a thinking being some
18,000,000 or so years ago on this, our Earth. (says the S D).

In my esteem one cannot acquire "esoteric" knowledge (say, of
chemistry, mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology, etc. without
going through a great deal of time and study of detail and well as
those fundamentals which serve at all times to unite the details to
the rest of everything -- for any of those sciences (and I am
deliberately at this time excluding the arts, humanities, and the
study of psychology in general, as they would need life-times of
careful investigation) needs study and a grasp of fundamentals before
one plunges below the surface that most people see, and have not
tried (so far) to penetrate.

For this reason you will find that some who have studied and read the
Theosophy that HPB brought, seem to confine themselves to that study,
while also taking note of as many other aspects of knowledge as are
currently being investigated -- they get the efflorescence of those,
while concentrating on the real meanings and implications that
Theosophy offers.  In reality the study of Theosophy is the study of
the history of IDEAS, and this includes every department of science,
art, and the rest of Nature's vast dominions.  The true Theosophist
is a Universalist, a Generalist, and while being a living question
mark, he is also interested in the details of his own immediate
living place, and how to fit himself to be better able to help and
assist others who come in by him.

I am not trying to be mysterious, but if one recalls when one went to
college, one had already acquired through school the basics which
allowed one to survey the field of deeper learning and gradually
narrow one's study down into a few specialties.  If one became lost
in a few of these, the rest of the fields of learning gradually
acquired a peripheral position, and the interactive nature of all
was, and is, generally, lost sight of.

How do we recapture that over-all view?  Theosophy advocated
BROTHERHOOD as a primary consideration.  Universalism as a
curative from mental myopia.

If we take that one idea and extend it, we penetrate all the levels
of esotericism in time.  One of the implications is universality,
impartiality, study of law and laws, attention to the needs of
others, the concept that all beings are equally immortals, and that
LIFE is the prerogative, not of the few "Rights," but of everything
-- and the results of violating the 'rights' of any creature, or
atom, or structure, is that we have to learn not to do that and to
give them the 'elbow-room' that they deserve in their sphere of
living.  We need to study our environment, as the ecologists do with
a milder eye.  The difference between "needs" and "wants (as Maslow
would put it) has to be learned.  This implies a bridling and control
of our own personal "desires."  And using our 'minds' we can do that.

Although our technological and information environment have developed
at the expense of fellow-feelings, as a careful and concentrated
study, which ought to be pursued by everyone, we need to recognize
that there is worth in such study and view.  If we reject this on the
grounds of uniqueness (our own) and the little time that we have to
acquire any profound knowledge of anything (this fleeting one-life),
then we forget the concept of REINCARNATION -- which if coupled with
Karma-Law, would give every being adequate time to live and study all
they need to know and desire to master.

So Theosophy draws our attention to those two ideas as developments
out of brotherhood:  I mean, Karma and Reincarnation.  They are, in
effect the operation of fairness and consideration in place already
in NATURE, and give each level of intelligence its rightful place.

The concept that man's mind gives him authority over others, whether
they be his fellows or the lower constructs of living Nature
(animals, vegetables, minerals -- the 'elements', etc.) is quite
erroneous.  Brotherhood if truly applied implies careful
understanding of the dues and rights of all beings around us.  it
sound "Buddhistic,"  but, remember that Christianity is derived from
Buddhism and it was not until the Council of Nicea in 325 AD that the
links between the two systems were severed by the organized church.
And that is another story.

I do not mean to take much of your time, but hope that these few
ideas help.  I admit that I am an enthusiast, and enjoy this type of
interchange.

If you find some writers and friends of yours (in theosophical
dialog) it is not to cut you short, but to provide you with a view of
the tools that they used to secure their present mind-sets.

No true Theosophist is ever entirely and rigidly set on anything.
They recognize the inevitability of change, while paradoxically
insisting on the unity of the inner PERCEIVER, the One Witness which
uses our body as one of its lodgings.

If the borrowed intelligence, presently resident in our brain-minds
decides in its pride that it is THE ONE, it errs seriously, and the
whole impact of Karmic law then sets to work to bring about a
reconciliation.  it is done persuasively, gently, but with an
incredible strength.  Everything that we, as thinking individuals
touch, however fleetingly, will be affected by the power of our
desires and thoughts. Being affected their own inner intelligence,
they weigh the justice of how they had been treated, and from them
emanates a current of response which is in return focused on the one
that had affected them. [ We can see this in the effect of our diet
on our physical bodies, for instance, or, or the type of reading we
indulge in, on our own mind-set.  But more important, What is it in
us that is so detached from either of these situations, that it
enables us to even consider them impersonally ? ]

There is something in us which considers the value of our thoughts
and feelings.  Is it not the true "I" ?  And if there is the
recognition of this true I, should we, as brain-mind beings not
attempt to know more of it?  And is this attempt not a sample of our
own personal "esotericism ?"  And if this is a generally recognized
fact, then do not students of "themselves" band together to exchange
ideas and experiences, so that their conjoint findings assume the
nature of a study of "occultism ?"  This has always been an on-going
situation in the world, and it underlies the humdrum living of the
daily grind !

There are no 'quick-fixes."  (And, especially not in 'esotericism.')
All study and inquiry requires time, and then when one is fortunate
one comes across books and people who ask inconvenient questions, an"
gradually we are forced to outgrow the grooves of thought that the
average educational product of any age evolves -- they are the
visionaries, the poets, the sweet singers, the philosophers, the
"Socrates--the buzz-fly of Athens," and from them Myths, tales and
folk-lore, and Legends of prophets, seers, and right-action arise and
reside in the continuing memories of all and curiously if not
especially, in the minds of the "common folk."  Why are the lives and
words of Jesus, Apollonius of Tyanna, Buddha, Lao-Tse, Pythagoras,
Aesulapius, Herodotus, Pico della Mirandola, Paracelsus,
Schopenhauer, Kant, Dante, Shakespeare, and a thousand others from
various and many cultures -- Krishna, Chwang Tzu, Confucius, Manco
Capac, Hiawatha, Odin, the Druids, the Fire Philosophers, etc... the
Brothers of Light, the Brotherhood of Luxor, the Rosicrucians, etc...
what were their traditions ?  What had they to study and to preserve
and to pass on ?  No, the TRUTH is no one's property, it is
universally the inheritance of the world of thinkers.  Truth never
belongs to any one of the religions, and especially not to those that
have become "organized."

No matter how brief or how insignificant our lives are in reality,
they are of general value to those who look at and approve or
disapprove of them.  The moral issue lies below each level of
investigation.  It is truly "esoteric."  It is personal and marks the
growing tip of personal responsibility as one tries to emulate in
their operation the great laws of our Universe, and to successfully
meld into the pattern of life that surrounds us.  We will always be
'ourselves.'  But the truly esoteric investigator recognizes that his
or her MOTIVE is all important, and that all starts with that.  And,
what is motive ?  Each answers that only to themselves.

Your inquiry has engendered thee musings and ---

I do hope this will be of some help,				Dallas

----------
| From: "Pat F" <pathfinder@pcpostal.com>
| Subject: Re:Theos World - "Golden Precepts" of GdeP
| Date: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 6:45 PM
|
| M K Ramadoss wrote:			<  SNIP>
|