Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00701)

I was wanting to see if any one had info of atlantis we hacve a discussion coming on subnday wanted to see what a theosophical point of view may be taken I understand HPB spweaks of the lemurians is there any info on atlantis thank you. Colleen

theos-talk@yahoogroups.com wrote: There are 13 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. RE: Blavatsky & Philosophy SPIRIT - SOUL - MIND
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" 
2. "CYCLES OF PSYCHISM" (10-part series)
From: Compiler 
3. ps, And more on the subject
From: "thalprin" 
4. Fwd: Breaking news on the Physics fronteir!!! William Q. Judge working on
From: "netemara888" 
5. Just published . . . new book on Blavatsky! HELENA BLAVATSKY Edited and introduced by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" 
6. Humans and ego !
From: "Raghu K" 
7. Science and theosophy
From: leonmaurer@aol.com
8. RE: [bn-study] RE: PREDECESSORS OF HPB -- MAGICK OR MAGIC ?
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" 
9. ReWriting the SD?
From: "thalprin" 
10. Re: Science and theosophy
From: "thalprin" 
11. Re: RE: [bn-study] RE: PREDECESSORS OF HPB -- MAGICK OR MAGIC ?
From: samblo@cs.com
12. Inn a Mighty Ocean/Shore
From: "thalprin" 
13. Re: Inn a Mighty Ocean/Ssshore
From: "thalprin" 


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 05:05:39 -0700
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" 
Subject: RE: Blavatsky & Philosophy SPIRIT - SOUL - MIND

Monday, April 26, 2004





RE: Blavatsky & Philosophy -- SPIRIT - SOUL - MIND





Dear Friends: and G.:







As far as I am able to understand, there is in each of us a stable center of
thought - call it the "rabbit" or the "Real Man" - the name matters little.
It is a spiritual being, permanent and reincarnates (according to THEOSOPHY
).



The interesting thing is that there is in us THAT which watches the "Real
Man" (or the thinker) and / or the "rabbit" that is duly cautious.



The "need to know" is apparent in both. Caution is a necessity always, 



What have we here to consider together? How shall we approach the subject?



As I see it: we have 



1 A Thinker and an "emotional" capacity to "feel" the tenor of
meanings.



2 Memories, since everything we consider has antecedents, and those
are linked to the "selected thing" - on review, as a series of interlinked
observations extending back in time to the area when they first attracted
our attention. Those are either logical or illogical and fanciful.



3 The capacity to reason from premises to conclusions and from
present observations back to our earlier considerations and conclusions, as
well as fancy, whereby we seek to establish a reasonable (or a frivolous)
basis for our thinking on selected specifics.



4 This implies the potential and actual power to choose, or to
refuse to choose (which, paradoxically is also choice) - producing the
"thirst for knowledge," or a rejection that keeps us in "ignorance". (we
know, but reject that knowledge , perhaps for the reason that it does not
please us emotionally).



5 It is interesting to note that we live between these two "poles."
TO DO or NOT TO DO. LIKES and DISLIKES. But always these are mutable and
changeable. 



6. The "changeless" and "Permanent" in us -- as the "stable" --
sees and observes "changes." Where? : as a contrast between current
objects, and views, and our memory pictures, made in the past, and more or
less distorted by time and desire. [ I find my mind is not always accurate
or able to call up (as memory in hypnotism demonstrates) that secondary,
underlying total memory of all that has occurred.]



7. If we desire to learn and distinguish this tumbled mess, we need
to establish for ourselves a discipline that provides for accurate thought
sequence as distinguished form what we may "like or dislike." So the real
question as I see it here, is do we want to KNOW or do we want to drift
from fancy to fancy?



May I offer this?



Have you ever read PATANJALI ON THE MIND ? He was an ancient sage that
tried to organize thinking. Let me offer a few words from him that will
give you an introduction:



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



The book has been of use only to those who had enough acquaintance with the
Indian system of philosophy to enable them to grasp the real meaning of the
Aphorisms.



It is offered as an interpretation, as the thought of Patanjali clothed in
our language. No liberties have been taken with the system of the great
Sage, but the endeavor has been faithfully to interpret it to Western minds
unfamiliar with the Hindu modes of expression, and equally unaccustomed to
their philosophy and logic. 





Patanjali is an ancient sage and philosopher of him all that we have is the
philosophy. 



In regard to the systems of Yoga, Col. Olcott, President of the
Theosophical Society, in the Bombay edition of these Aphorisms, in August,
1885 said: 



"The Yoga system is divided into two principal parts - Hatha and Raja Yoga.
There are many minor divisions which can be brought under either of these
heads. Hatha Yoga .deals principally with the physiological part of man with
a view to establish his health and train his will. The processes prescribed
to arrive at this end are so difficult that only a few resolute souls go
through all the stages of its practice, while many have failed and died in
the attempt. It is therefore strongly denounced by all the philosophers. The
most illustrious Sankaracharya has remarked .that 'the system of Hatha Yoga
was intended for those whose worldly desires are not pacified or uprooted.' 



"On the other hand, the Raja Yogis try to control the mind itself by
following the rules laid down by the greatest of adepts." 



Patanjali's rules (if adopted) would compel the student not only to acquire
a right knowledge of what is and what is not real, but also to practice all
virtues, and while results in the way of psychic development are not so
immediately seen as in the case of the successful practitioner of Hatha
Yoga, it is infinitely safer and is certainly spiritual, which Hatha Yoga is
not. 



In Patanjali's Aphorisms.he distinctly says that mortification and other
practices are either for the purpose of extenuating certain mental
afflictions or for the more easy attainment of concentration of mind. 



In Hatha Yoga practice, on the contrary, the result is psychic development
at the delay or expense of the spiritual nature. These last named practices
and results may allure the Western student.



This book is meant for sincere students, and especially for those who have
some glimmering of what Krishna meant, when in Bhagavad-Gita he said, that
after a while "spiritual knowledge grows up within and illuminates with its
rays all subjects and objects." 



It should be ever borne in mind that Patanjali had no need to assert or
enforce the doctrine of reincarnation. That is assumed all through the
Aphorisms. That it could be doubted, or need any restatement, never occurred
to him, and by us it is alluded to, not because we have the smallest doubt
of its truth, but only because we see about us those who never heard of such
a doctrine, who, educated under the dogmas of Christian priestcraft, imagine
that upon quitting this life they will enjoy heaven. or be damned eternally,
and who not once pause to ask where was their soul before it came into the
present body. 



Without reincarnation, Patanjali's Aphorisms are worthless. .The
manifestation, in any incarnation, of the effects of mental deposits made in
previous lives, is declared to ensue upon the obtaining of just the kind of
bodily and mental frame, constitution and environment as will bring them
out. Where were these deposits received if not in preceding lives on earth.
And so on all through the Aphorisms this law is tacitly admitted.



In order to understand the system expounded in this book it is also
necessary to admit the existence of soul, and the comparative unimportance
of the body in which it dwells. 



For Patanjali holds that NATURE EXISTS FOR THE SOUL'S SAKE, taking it for
granted that the student believes in the existence of Soul. Hence he does
not go into proof of that which in his day was admitted on every hand. 



And, as he lays down that the real experiencer and knower is the Soul and
not the mind, it follows that the Mind, designated either as "internal
organ," or "thinking principle," while higher and more subtle than the body,
is yet only an instrument used by the Soul in gaining experience, just in
the same way as an astronomer uses his telescope for acquiring information
respecting the heavens. 



But the Mind is a most important factor in the pursuit of concentration; one
indeed without which concentration cannot be obtained, and therefore we see
in the first book that to this subject Patanjali devotes attention. He shows
that the mind is, as he terms it, "modified" by any object or subject
brought before it, or to which it is directed. This may be well illustrated
by quoting a passage from the commentator, who says: "The internal organ is
there compared to water in respect of its readiness to adapt itself to the
form of whatever mold it may enter. 



'As the waters of a reservoir, having issued from an aperture, having
entered by a channel the basins, become four-cornered or otherwise shaped,
just like them; so the manifesting internal organ having gone through the
sight, or other channel, to where there is one object, for instance a jar,
becomes modified by the form of the jar or other object. It is this altered
state of the internal organ - or mind - that is called its modification.' 



While the internal organ (MIND) thus molds itself upon the object it at the
same time reflects it and its properties to the soul. The channels by which
the mind is held to go out to an object or subject, are the organs of sight,
touch, taste, hearing, and so on. Hence by means of hearing it shapes itself
into the form of the idea which may be given in speech, or by means of the
eye in reading, it is molded into the form of that which is read; again,
sensations such as heat and cold modify it directly and indirectly by
association and by recollection, and similarly in the ease of all senses and
sensations. 



It is further held that this internal organ, while having an innate
disposition to assume some modification or other depending upon constantly
recurring objects- whether directly present or only such as arise from the
power of reproducing thoughts, whether by association or otherwise, may be
controlled and stilled into a state of absolute calmness. This is what he
means by "hindering the modifications." 



And just here it is seen that the theory of the soul's being the real
experiencer and knower is necessary. 



For if we are but mind, or slaves of mind, we never can attain real
knowledge because the incessant panorama of objects eternally modifies that
mind which is uncontrolled by the soul, always preventing real knowledge
from being acquired. 



But as the Soul is held to be superior to Mind, it has the power to grasp
and hold the latter if we but use the will to aid it in the work, and then
only the real end and purpose of mind is brought about. 



These propositions imply that the will is not wholly dependent on the mind,
but is separable from it; and, further, that knowledge exists as an
abstraction. The will and mind are only servants for the soul's use, but so
long as we are wrapped up in material life and do not admit that the real
knower and only experiencer is the soul, just so long do these servants
remain usurpers of the soul's sovereignty. Hence it is stated in old Hindu
works, that "the Soul is the friend of Self and also its enemy; and, that a
man should raise the self by the self." 



In other words there is a constant struggle between the lower and the Higher
Self, in which the illusions of matter always wage war against the Soul,
tending ever to draw downward the inner principles which, lying midway
between the upper and the lower, are capable of reaching either salvation or
damnation.



There is no reference in the Aphorisms to the will. It seems to be inferred,
either as well understood and admitted, or as being one of the powers of
soul itself and not to be discussed. Many old Hindu writers hold, and we
incline to the same view, that Will is a spiritual power, function or
attribute constantly present in every portion of the Universe. 



It is a colorless power, to which no quality of goodness or badness is to be
assigned, but which may be used in whatever way man pleases. When considered
as that which in ordinary life is called "will," we see its operation only
in connection with the material body and mind guided by desire; looked at in
respect to the hold by man upon life it is more recondite, because its
operation is beyond the ken of the mind; analyzed as connected with
reincarnation of man or with the persistence of the manifested universe
throughout a Manvantara, it is found to be still more removed from our
comprehension and vast in its scope. 



In ordinary life it is not man's servant, but, being then guided solely by
desire, it makes man a slave to his desires. Hence the old cabalistic maxim,
"BEHIND WILL STANDS DESIRE." 



The desires always drawing the man hither and thither, cause him to commit
such actions and have such thoughts as form the cause and mold for numerous
reincarnations, enslaving him to a destiny against which he rebels, and that
constantly destroys and re-creates his mortal body. 



It is an error to say of those who are known as strong-willed men, that
their wills are wholly their servants, for they are so bound in desire that
it, being strong, moves the will into action for the consummation of wished
for ends. Every day we see good and evil men prevailing in their several
spheres. To say that in one there is good, and in the other evil will is
manifestly erroneous and due to mistaking will, the instrument or force, for
desire that sets it in motion toward a good or bad purpose. 



But Patanjali and his school well knew that the secret of directing the will
with ten times the ordinary force might be discovered if they outlined the
method, and then bad men whose desires were strong and conscience wanting,
would use it with impunity against their fellows; or that even sincere
students might be carried away from spirituality when dazzled by the
wonderful results flowing from a training of the will alone. Patanjali is
silent upon the subject for this reason among others. 



The system postulates that "Ishwara," the 'Spirit in man,' is "untouched by
any troubles, works, fruit of works, or desires, and when a firm position is
assumed with the end in view of reaching union with spirit through
concentration," He (the Higher Self, or Spirit) comes to the aid of the
lower self and raises it gradually to higher planes. In this process the
Will by degrees is given a stronger and stronger tendency to act upon a
different line from that indicated by passion and desire. Thus it is freed
from the domination of desire and at last subdues the mind itself. 



But before the perfection of the practice is arrived at the will still acts
according to desire, only that the desire is for higher things and away from
those of the material life. Book III is for the purpose of defining the
nature of the perfected state, which is therein denominated 'Isolation.'



Isolation of the Soul in this philosophy does not mean that a man is
isolated from his fellows, becoming cold and dead, but only that THE SOUL IS
ISOLATED OR FREED FROM THE BONDAGE OF MATTER AND DESIRE, being thereby able
to act for the accomplishing of the aim of Nature and Soul, including all
souls of all men. 



Such, in the Aphorisms, is clearly stated to be the purpose. 



It has become the habit of many superficial readers and thinkers, to say
nothing of those who oppose the Hindu philosophy, to assert that .Adepts
remove themselves from all life of men, from all activity, and any
participation in human affairs, isolating themselves on inaccessible
mountains where no human cry can reach their ears. Such a charge is directly
contrary to the tenets of the philosophy which prescribes the method and
means for reaching such a state. 



These Beings are certainly removed from human observation, but, as the
philosophy clearly states, they have the whole of nature for their object,
and this will include all living men. They may not appear to take any
interest in transitory improvements or ameliorations, but they work behind
the scenes of true enlightenment until such times as men shall be able to
endure their appearance in mortal guise. 



The term "knowledge" as used here has a greater meaning than we are
accustomed to giving it. It implies full identification of the mind, for any
length of time, with whatever object or subject it is directed to. 



Modern science and metaphysics do not admit that the mind can cognize
outside of certain given methods and distances, and in most quarters the
existence of soul is denied or ignored. It is held, for instance, that one
cannot know the constituents and properties of a piece of stone without
mechanical or chemical aids applied directly to the object; and that nothing
can be known of the thoughts or feelings of another person unless they are
expressed in words or acts. Where metaphysicians deal with soul they are
vague and appear to be afraid of science, because it is not possible to
analyse it and weigh its parts in a balance. Soul and Mind are reduced to
the condition of limited instruments which take note of certain physical
facts spread before them through mechanical aids. Or, in ethnological
investigation, it is held that we can know such and such things about
classes of men from observations made through sight, touch, sense of smell
and hearing, in which case mind and soul are still mere recorders. 



But this system declares that the practitioner who has reached certain
stages, can direct his mind to a piece of stone, whether at a distance or
near by, or to a man or class of men, and by means of concentration, cognize
all the inherent qualities of the objects as well as accidental
peculiarities, and know all about the subject... In the ease of the Yoga
practitioner he becomes, through the power of concentration, completely
identified with the thing considered, and so in fact experiences in himself
all the phenomena exhibited by the object as well as all its qualities. 



To make it possible to admit all this, it is first required that the
existence, use and function of an ethereal medium penetrating everywhere,
called ASTRAL LIGHT or Akasa by the Hindus, should be admitted. 



The Universal distribution of this as a fact in nature is metaphysically
expressed in the terms "Universal Brotherhood" and "Spiritual Identity." 



In it, through its aid, and by its use, the qualities and motions of all
objects are universally cognizable. It is the surface, so to say, upon which
all human actions and all things, thoughts and circumstances are fixed..The
ascetic in concentration fixes his attention upon this, and then reads the
record lost to Science. Every thought .is fastened in the Astral Light
together with the respective systems of Philosophy formulated by anyone.
And all that the ascetic has to do is to obtain a single point of departure
connected with any object, and then to read in the Astral Light all that
they have thought out. By Patanjali and his school, such feats as these
relate to matter and not to spirit, although to Western ears they will sound
either absurd, or if believed in, as relating to spirit. 



In the things of the spirit and of the mind, the modern schools seem, to the
sincere student of this Philosophy, to be woefully ignorant. What spirit may
be is absolutely unknown, and indeed, it cannot yet be stated what it is

=== message truncated ===



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]