Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00105)

In a message dated 4/8/99 4:30:53 PM, schuelergerald@optec-hq.optec.army.mil 
writes:

>>>>> Neither Atma nor Buddhi are ever reached by Karma, because the
>former is the highest aspect of Karma, its working agent of ITSELF in
>one aspect, and the other is unconscious on this plane.<<<<
>
>This wonderful quote from HPB says exactly what I have
>been saying.  Atma and Buddhi are in maya because they
>are both located within our 7 plane solar system. I 
>interpret the above quote to mean that karma only exists
>within our 7-plane solar system, which is exactly what I
>have said. Thanks Peter for showing everyone where I was 
>coming from.

Really?  In my book that statement could mean just the opposite.  How can 
Atma and Buddhi be in our "7 plane solar system," also be Maya (which I take 
it you mean nonexistent per se or an illusion), and at the same time be 
spoken of by HPB as if one were outside of karma as the "agent" of it (but 
still real) and the other unconscious ON THIS PLANE?  If consciousness is the 
root of all reality, as you said previously, and therefore not a "Maya," then 
something unconscious on this plane is necessarily conscious on another, and 
therefor also of "real existence."  It's amazing how you manage to twist 
anything anyone quotes to counter your opinions, as being a total black and 
white confirmation of them.  Where are the nuances of meaning that can be had 
when we understand the "relative" nature of all "things"?  Or, the fine 
shadings of theosophical principles and their varying energetic levels of 
action?

If you would examine my chakrafield diagram at: 
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html 
and see that all existence is both a Maya and a Karma from the point of view 
of the Absolute (even the consciousness field itself) you would hesitate 
making such blanket statements as if they were absolute facts.  However, when 
we speak of enlightenment, we speak only in relative terms since from the 
point of view of the higher nature, only the lower nature is Maya.  

As HPB also taught--on whatever plane one is on, all things on that plane are 
not Maya, but apparently "real existence" to the observing self awareness.  
If I were to believe the various teachings that conclude that everything on 
the lower planes is mayavic or illusory, I would stand out in the street and 
let myself be run over by a truck.:-)   Remember, there are actually at least 
7 times 7 planes, or within each of the major 7 there are 7 sub planes.  At 
any given moment our consciousness can exist on and identify with any of 
those 7 major planes--within which karma must operate on the sub planes 
related to it. (Substitute "field" for plane when speaking of cyclic action 
or karma, since plane refers to the zero-point center of awareness while 
"field" refers to the cyclic wave form surrounding it.)  Note that all fields 
are equivalent or analogous to all other fields in their structure from the 
largest and most subtle universal fields to the smallest field within our 7 
fold human nature on the lowest plane. 

LHM 

 




-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.