Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00422)

Dear Jerry:

I think the problem is that a MONAD on one plane is a departure
point for diversity on another.

when I use the word MONAD I assume pretty much the following:

We are either dealing with the PRIMORDIAL MONAD or with the
Manifested MONAD.


1. The PRIMORDIAL MONAD would be (to me) the ABSOLUTENESS. No
possible description applies.

2. The MONAD IN MANIFESTATION contains potentially a number of
things.

I am probably quite wrong in not always précising the
distinction, and as intellectually I deal (metaphysically) only
with the Monad in manifestation, I assume that I, and my
correspondent will have in mind the Monad in manifestation which
is in fact several things, all interdependent and all "eternal"
for the period of the Manvantara.

Strictly speaking they can be called Maya or Illusions when
contrasted with their UNITARY SOURCE that is truly eternal.

But also, as in the case of the Ego that undergoes Devachan only
to reincarnate, so the individual Monads return to the ONE, and
again emanate from IT (under their individual Karma). They do
not entirely lose their INDIVIDUALITY in Pralaya [ S D I p. 27,
Sloka 8 -- "the opened eye of the Dangma" implies(to me) that the
WISE DHYANI BUDDHAS transcend even Maha-Pralaya. H.P.Blavatsky
hints at this in her article ISIS UNVEILED AND THE
VISISHTADWAITA,
[Theosophist, January 1886; BLAVATSKY: Collected Works (TPH),
Vol. 7, p. 50; UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS: H P B Articles
Vol. III. p. 265] .


As a correspondence, or an analogy, let me use this very limited
concept:

The "white light" of a ray of the sun when passing through a
glass pyramid splits into the innumerable rays a spectrometer
distinguishes -- but, broadly we could say there are the "7n
colors of the spectrum." Both positions are correct. Our
physical eye does not see the panorama of rays until we use the
apparatus.

To further complicate the matter each "ray of color" (used as a
symbol for one of the "principles" (of either Nature or Man)
contains as sub-rays aspects of the other "6 colors." The pattern
could be said to make up 49 (7 x 7) divisions -- there are of
course many more.

If we limit ourselves to the physical plane and its mathematics
you are correct. a MONAD is indivisible, even if also universal.

But to proceed from the ONE SOURCE --- the ORIGINAL MONAD to the
diversity of MANY MONADS the process of emanation would require
at least 7 distinct stages { see S D II 596 }

On SECRET DOCTRINE I 157 we see how the several philosophical
Schools have divided the MONAD into seven planes, levels,
sheaths, vehicles, etc...

And there is where the student of theosophy carelessly uses the
word "Monad" when it is already subdivided. As, for instance it
is said to contain ATMA + BUDDHI (a duad), or logically ATMA +
BUDDHI +MANAS (a triad) and if we were to place the manifested
MONAD against the eternal background of the indescribable
ABSOLUTENESS ( the real conceptual and only MONAD ) you would
find you were dealing with the word MONAD, and endowing it
mentally with:

1.	the Absolute ( as background, interpenetrating it always)
TIMELESS. UNDIFFERENTIATED. Truly ETERNAL and INSCRUTABLE.
UNIVERSALLY and always PRESENT.

----------------- MANIFESTATION
RESTARTS ---------------------------------------------


[MANIFESTATION (in reality, a re-emanation) takes place under
UNIVERSAL KARMA.
Manvantaric TIME begins, the non-eternal EGG or MONAD in
manifestation
reappears. Evolution in limited time, space, matter and energy
stats again. "Brahma" is to be seen asleep, the awaking in the
primordial HIRANYAGARBHA (Symbolic Egg).

Patanjali says: " For the sake of the Soul the Universe
exists." [Pat. Book i, pp 24-5] ]


2.	ATMA (the ONE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT in manifestation) Negative
Pole
3. BUDDHI ( Primordial primitive undivided ROOT-MATTER )
Positive Pole
4.	HIRANYAGARBHA (the radiant electro-magnetic sphere that has
no limits but is also UNIVERSAL from the point of view of
manifestation.

Further, all 4 (the divine TETRAKTYS) have to be perceived by
another individualized aspect of being,

5.	MANAS (MAHAT on the Cosmic plane) -- the MIND ( Manas ).
Since this is independent of both and is sensitive to their
interaction at all levels it can be called THE ONE CONSCIOUSNESS.
It is also part of the immortal and eternal MONAD in
Manifestation.

I hope that this adjusts our respective meanings.

Best wishes,

Dallas

PS	I have interposed some more statements below in the body of
your text.


================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Schueler
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 6:00 PM
To:
Subject: Response to Dallas


DTB
<<<Suppose we were to apply to the question the idea
H.P.Blavatsky gives concerning the UNIVERSAL MONAD and its 7
PRIMORDIAL SUB-DIVISIONS -- perhaps we could call them Dhyan
Chohans or Dhyani Buddhas. (S D I 570 - 575; I 619 - 634)>>>>>


GS
Dallas, your above statement goes right to heart of the entire
problem that I have with Theosophical logic and terminology. Can
you please explain to me how a "universal monad" (and this is a
redundancy, because any monad has to be universal by definition -
there is no such thing as a local monad) can possibly have "7
primordial sub-divisions" when a monad, by my definition, is
INDIVISIBLE?????? The answer, my friend, is that you can't. It
is just this kind of illogical crazy use of words that turns me
off.

Now, I am probably very wrong here, but quite honestly when I
read statements like the above, I conclude that you haven't a
clue as to what you are talking about and that you are merely
parroting words that you don't understand.

JERRY'S BOTTOM LINE: A Monad cannot have subdivisions. Period. To
say that it does defeats the whole idea of a monad, and it turns
the whole thing into meaningless words.

Why can't you say something to the effect that the monad, which
is inherently universal and unmanifested, is postulated to
express itself within our manifested universe into 7 separate
sub-divisions whose personifications are known to us as the
relatively primordial Dhyani-Chohans, or something along those
lines? Am I really asking too much for some logic?

----------------------------------------

DTB	To me, a MONAD is only a starting point. Many things are
implicit in potency in any Monad. The whole diversity of
evolution and the multiplicity of "Monads of lesser experience"
are to me part of that potential.

What can any one do with the concept of a totally ISOLATED MONAD
?

The fact that we may consider it and discuss it shows that
multiple views are possible. Does not the Mind enter here, and
also the contrast between ideal SPIRIT and localized FORMS of
matter.

How can MATTER or SUBSTANCE be defined ?

Who PERCEIVES any form?

What is the difference between PERCEPTION and FORM MATERIAL ?

==============================


DTB
<<<From the ABSOLUTE (under the Karma of repetitive
Manifestations,
caused by the many differentiated "monads of lesser experience")
there periodically is an emanation of MANIFESTATION on 7 planes
from Primordial to gross Matter. etc etc etc >>>>


GS
Oh wow. Dallas, I really do appreciate your enthusiasm, but there
is no logical way your above sentence can have any meaning. It
is, at least to me, gibberish. You seem to be saying that the
ABSOLUTE is under karma. This is, my friend, outright blasphemy.
How can karma and manifestation effect the ABSOLUTE in any way
whatsoever????? IT CAN'T. Logically, if it could, then it ain't
so absolute in the first place.

----------------------------

DTB	No: Karma is implied as a part of the ABSOLUTE. Or else how
does re-manifestation ever take place? It has to be under the
Karmic influence of Individual manifesting and evolving Monads --
which agreeably to you are all a part of the non-manifesting
ABSOLUTE.

-----------------------------

GS
In fact, the idea that an ABSOLUTE can manifest in any way
whatsoever is entirely illogical as well. However, I have agreed
to let this ride as an initial assumption that cannot be
logically explained and has to be accepted on blind faith.

When I talk about "logic" here, I am not getting into syllogisms
or any deep-meaning stuff - I mean simply that when one uses a
word that has a generally accepted or Theosophical meaning in a
way that means the very opposite, one should not be too surprised
to be labeled illogical.

====================================

DTB	I see. But you cannot isolate the implications to the
material plane alone.

The permutations of Source and Energy, and a passing from plane
to plane from the Spiritual through the Psychic and the Astral to
our eventual condition of an embodied mind limited in may ways to
the purely gross physical [see S D I 200] -- these have also to
be considered.

If I were to set my limits as you have to the physical plane. I
would say Yes: All is MAYA and temporary, and we are incapable
of visualizing anything beyond that.

But, to me the evidence is that I can perceive and think on a
plane other than the mere physical. So if my power of thought
transcends, then there is a logic that leads me to say all the
above. I find that The SECRET DOCTRINE offers those vistas.

Dal

==============================


Jerry S.


--



---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
dalval14@earthlink.net
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-14759P@list.vnet.net