Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00258)

>
>DALLAS I understand that, but, one has to take some basis at
>least.  What would you choose if you were studying mathematics,
>chemistry astronomy, etc...  I recall using basic texts when in
>schools and college and learned that most of the rest said the
>same thing.  I think theosophy is far vaster, but one might as
>well choose one that has apparently a basic stability to it.  I
>am constantly reviewing and restudying this philosophy, always in
>search of those things that will either reinforce or destroy it -
>so far, no cause for destruction or feeling unhappy with it.
>

Suppose someone tried to talk to you about calculus while you
were still learning trig? You would probably have to take their word
for it, knowing that someday you would learn enough to be able
to do calculus yourself. This is all that I am saying.


>There is a reference in SD I 31-2, 118 in which she says that the
>Lipika "stand in the middle wheel"   Apparently at a balance
>point.
>

Yes--this refers to the fourth cosmic plane, which Purucker calls
a pivot plane standing between the higher three spiritual
planes and the lower three material planes.


>Recorders (LIPIKA) would make a link to the causal plane.  In
>either case they are only an aspect of KARMA - the recording.
>The adjusting and precipitation of those cause would come later
>on, would it not, as another aspect of karma came into play, or
>am I wrong ?
>

I pretty much agree here. The "precipitation" you mentioned are
due to the shistas or "residue" of past karma. These reside
in the Abyss. They are the remainders of the past and the cause
of the future.


>It is not stated whether they (LIPIKA) are limited to some plane
>of matter or not.  I would tend to believe that they are not so
>limited, as their recording faculty wold persist whether there is
>a Manvantara or not, taking the permanency of Karma into account
>as a Universal principle and one of the aspects of the ABSOLUTE.
>

Without a manvantara there is nothing to record. As with human
beings, only the "aroma" of each manvantara is carried over to
the next. Technically karma is not an "aspect" of the Absolute
but rather a manifestation (it only exists in space-time).


> DAL: WISH I COULD  -- BUT, WOULD I REMEMBER  I don't think my
>personal embodied consciousness would be able to do that ?
>

Why not? I assume that your "personal embodied consciousness"
refers to your ego or personality, which is on the mental and astral
planes. This can't make it to the causal plane. But consciousness
itself can, and then comes the hard part--consciousness must
impress its experiences on the brain-mind in order for us to
recall anything. Dreamless sleep is often recalled as a blank
or coma simply because these impressions were not strong
enough for us to remember having any experiences. This is where
meditation helps--it sensitizes the lower mind to recieve the
subtle impressions of the higher planes. When you learn to
visit the Lipika, you can recall past lives, for example (my ability
to do this is still in infancy, so I can't help much in this area).

>
>As far as "restriction" is concerned, we are all restricted to
>certain
>locations.  This is what time and space imply--you can only be in
>one place at a time.  Only consciousness is un-restricted.
>
>
> DALLAS AGREED  But why ?
>


Because our space-time universe is one of definition, and when
we define something (anything at all) we simultaneous limit it to
that definition. Each plane downward into matter is a quantum
leap of definition and restriction.


>
>I think we all do that, Jerry, but also, we do try to find out
>where the Esoteric Philosophy deals with such a situation or
>event.  So far I have found that somewhere in the literature are
>points or hints given that seem to apply to all the strange
>things we encounter in our search.  And that is what makes it
>very encouraging, and has kept me trying to study and use
>Theosophy all these years.

Agreed.


> I find out that I am really very
>ignorant in so many things.  And I want to know and understand.
>

This is why you are a Theosophist.


>In many cases I have found strange statements made that I do not
>at that time understand.  I set them aside for thought and future
>discovery - so far I have in the course of years found answers
>that harmonized them with the whole Philosophy as presented.
>

Me too.


>What would be wrong in using the Theosophical Literature that
>streams from HPB as being primal, and probably the most accurate
>presentation, regardless of what subsequent students may have
>surmised ?

This is OK, until you have an experience of some kind that just
doesn't "fit" into what she said--or how you interpreted what
she said. I have found that a lot of "errors" in Blavatsky's works
were simply my own wrong interpretation of what she was
trying to say (her choice of words were limited, for one thing,
and sometimes she talks from oblique angles).


>But, as you suggest, all should be given their day.
>I specially value those who have the courage to refer to their
>sources, so that they can be checked independently.  If we are
>all searching for the TRUTH of things, there is nothing to hide,
>and no one has any ascendancy over others to protect.
>
>Thanks for the help Dal.
>

I agree with you, and I have no problem giving you my own
personal experiences as my source, when that it what it is.

Jerry S.