Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00435)

Aug 23, 2004

Dear Eldon:

Thanks for this posting. Most interesting.  

My approach to THEOSOPHY was from early childhood, my parents used to read
to me from the VOICE OF THE SILENCE, the DHAMMAPADA and the GITA . I really
became interested when at 18 I received a copy of ISIS UNVEILED and read it
with great interest -- I wanted to know more. Also I wanted to understand
the old words and strange languages -- so I studied the THEOSOPHICAL
GLOSSARY. My parents were associates of U L T and I have thought that it
was ideal for me to be able to freely study anything.  

We had "THEOSOPHY School" at Bombay U L T and I went to that, but I think I
learned more from my self-study, daily, half hour work. Of all the books
the one most helpful to me was Mr. Judge's The OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. I
compared it with the SECRET DOCTRINE, so as to verify the relationship
there. It was most satisfactory.

Question:

Do you know where I can secure a copy of Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY TO
NEO-THEOSOPHY - I want to download it. 

Also, I need to download a copy of Olcott's BUDDHIST CATECHISM. Do you have
a source for that?

Some years (?) ago you sent me a copy of a list in which you had detailed
the many Internet resources available to students of THEOSOPHY -- have you
kept that up-to-date? Can I have a current copy? [I have prepared a list
for U L T covering such things, Would you like a copy?]

Thanks and best wishes

(see below the symbology of the little statues) 

Dallas

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

PS

Let me talk about the statues I passed on to you as their new guardian.

The bronze Shiva -- as NATARAJ -- depicts symbolically the "dancing in of
the Cosmos" when Manvantara begins again.  

That bronze I got in Trivandrum in So. India (just outside the main Temple
there) when I went there in 1968, it is fairly old and was said to have been
cast and used for about 700 years or so. It was used in a brahmanical
family's "puja" room -- a room set apart in the home of all Brahmins for
worship and study.

Shiva, as Rudra the "destroyer" presides over the onset of Pralaya.  

But he is also the "regenerator" and therefore, as Nataraj, he returns at
the dawn of Manvantara -- to assist Brahma, as master of the "dance" of
KARMA, and of all the rhythms of life, he re-establishes the basic as well
as the many smaller life-cycles that were moved over from the prevous
Manvantara. Those cycles under Karma, which is eternal, bind many groups of
interacting Monads together. The S D Vol. I gives further details. This is
why, as Master (overseer) of Karma, all Monadic (and Manasic) evolution and
of the Cycles, he is the YOGI of all Yogis. His antiquity is lost in the
"night of time." He is an integral part of Krishna as MAHA-VISHNU -- the
eternal living -- ETERNAL UNIVERSE.

He is shown in his four arm state holding the Fire Of Wisdom, he is then the
MAHADEVA -- the YOGI of Yogis -- the teacher and regulator of the Inner
School (S D II 282, 613; I 358). He reduces all folly and passions to
asjes. (In this he regenerates -- see KAMADEVA in Theosophical Glossary p.
170-1).

He also carries in one hand the little "dhamru" drum that marks for this
particular Manvantara, the measures and beat of the eternal Song -- the
Symphony of Evoutionary progress for all beings -- symbolically it marks the
regular succession of the yugas, cycles, hours, days, weeks, months, etc.
and anyting to do with years and with the reincarnation of the human
spirit/soul.  

One of his hands is raised palm outward: "Fear not." "You are the Eternal
Man."

The other points down to "the material plane" typified by the little imp on
which one of his feet rests -- there, it typifyies the defeat (control and
subjugation) of personal and selfish passions and desires -- which, when
controled, form the basis for all material evolution (the 4 lower planes
shown in the diagram in S D I 200). 

Thus Nataraj has many implied meanings.

2

The Little Bronze "shrine" is older than the Nataraj being about 1200 years
old and I found it in Indore at one of the bazaars there -- it was destined
to be melted down and its metal reused. I rescued it. In it the Brahmin
family shrine, an image was placed in it. I put the ivory Ganapati there.
(carved about 1930)

Gnapati was a son of Siva born to Uma/Parvati while he was away on his
austerities. He returned and the child, in play, importuned him (it is
said). Disturbed, Siva is said symboically to have "cut off his head,"
(i.e. : severed Kama-Manas from Buddhi-Manas)  

Realizing that this was not correct, Siva looked around for the child's head
to reattach it through his yogi power. It was not to be found as Shiva's 3rd
Eye had disintegrated it completely. It so hapend a young elephant near the
house had died, and Siva cut off its head and planted it on the child's
body. 

Symbolically this indicates the wisest of the animal evoutionary faclties
was attached as the "crown" to a growing human body -- Kama as the highest
aspect of Instinct attached to thephysical form on one side and to mind
(Manas) -- (or, rather to "Kama-Manas").  

The child was named Ganesha (or in popular terms Gana-patti -- "Father
Ganesha" -- the "guardian, and playmate of all children.).  

His assumed duty was to become a Lipika -- the recorder of wisdom, teachings
history, and continually recording the evoluton of Nature, of all worlds,
and of the entire Universe. As a "God-Scribe" [Lipika] he was universal, and
functions were to record everything in theAkasa as it happened --
indellibly, ineffaceably -- for all beings, and for all times. 

So there you have the little idols and their inner meanings. 

This will give you an idea of some of the symbology to be found attached to
most of the individuals in the pantheon of "gods" in Hindu Theogony. The
Puranas (Old Tradions and Writings) narrate these legends and myths, but
there is always an inner significnce to be sought out. It is like the "Heart
Doctrine: -- concealed to all but the inner "Eye." 

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


-----Original Message-----

From: Eldon B Tucker [mailto:eldon@theosophy.com] 
Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2004 8:49 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World freedom of belief and how best to share our ideas


Perry:

Many years ago, my first exposure to Theosophy came through reading 
Leadbeater's books. I later came across Ken Small at Far Horizons 
Theosophical Camp in Northern California, where he and Lina Psaltis gave me 
some books by G. de Purucker. These books proved helpful in broadening my 
thinking, and made Blavatsky's writings understandable to me. From there, I 
read more of the core literature, and came across comparisons of 
Blavatsky's Theosophy with Leadbeater's. The most colorful comparisons 
were in old issues of the O.E. Library Critic by Stokes. The term 
"Neo-Theosophy" was used to describe how Leadbeater's writings diverged 
from the original.

When I was first reading the comparisons, I would also use the term 
"Neo-Theosophy," but have since come to realize that it is a derogatory 
term. It doesn't just say "this is something different," but seems to imply 
"this is something extremely inferior." If when I was steeped in 
Leadbeater's writings and had been exposed to little else, I would have 
responded unfavorable to the term and found it alienating. On the other 
hand, simply begin given some of Purucker's works and exposed to the depths 
that I later came to see in them, I found it ease to move on and broaden my 
theosophical thinking. If it were not for Leadbeater's writings, I would 
not have been initially drawn to Theosophy, but equally important was the 
manner in which I was approached to share other ideas also of value. And by 
the way, the best of his books, which I highly recommend to theosophical 
students, is FUNDAMENTALS OF THE ESOTERIC PHILOSOPHY, based upon a class he 
gave at Point Loma on THE SECRET DOCTRINE in the 1920's when he was a 
regular theosophical student, before he became international head of the 
Theosophical Society. (This is the Point Loma Society, tracing its history 
back through the Judge side of the Judge/Olcott split in the 1890's.)

Official journals are the mouthpiece of an organization's leadership, and 
would reflect their view on Theosophy and what is proper theosophical 
discussion. This is from THEIR point of view, as people leading the 
organization with their own viewpoints. If something is not given space in 
such a journal, it is because the editors deem it inappropriate, off topic, 
or offensive from THEIR point of view.

This does not preclude any number of independent journals expressing other 
viewpoints. It's just that the other journals do not have access to funds 
from donations and membership dues and do not have access to mailing and 
email addresses of members. But independent journals can be created and 
thrive nevertheless, crossing organizational boundaries and reaching people 
of many backgrounds. Each journal can express a certain viewpoint from its 
own perspective and collectively all the journals can cover the full 
spectrum of viewpoints. It's in the mailing lists, thought, where every 
possible view can meet face-to-face with others, as long as the listowner 
doesn't moderate it, filtering things, enforcing his own slant to how ideas 
should be aired.

-- Eldon

CUT