Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00271)

Hi Perry. I appreciate your information below. After a weekend with
Frances I have a greater respect for "planetaries" in all forms and a rather
large limb on my roof as well.

The additional comments from everyone who contributed to this thread are
appreciated. I read them all.

Perry, I like your comments about increasing responsibility with respect
to dyhan chohans. I think I recall that somewhere in the ML's there is a
statement to the effect that the dyhan chohan's responsibility is to watch
over and protect without interference. Can you share any thoughts that
distinguish between watching over, protecting, and interfering with?
Especially that word "protect" has me wondering a bit.

regards,

Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Meredith" <meredith_bill@e...>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: No reply to Bill Meredith's Excellent Post


> Thanks Perry. This is an excellent post. I will be busy for the rest of
the
> weekend, but will try to respond after the holiday.
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 03, 2004 10:39 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: No reply to Bill Meredith's Excellent Post
>
>
> > Hi Bill and all.
> > Just a couple of thoughts and a few quotes to speculate on this
> > subject :
> >
> > "Now, an entity, that is passing through the occult training in its
> > successive births, gradually has less and less (in each incarnation)
> > of that lower Manas until there arrives a time when its whole Manas,
> > being of an entirely elevated character, is centered in the higher
> > individuality, when such a person may be said to have become a
> > MAHATMA."
> > http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/MahatmasAndChelas.htm
> >
> > Regarding the Mahatma's and their "Chiefs" the way I understand
> > what is presented is the Mahatmas belong to an Occult order.
> > According to theosophical teachings as presented by HPB and her
> > teachers the Cosmos is hierarchical .
> > This hierarchy (I once heard Ken Wilber describe as a Whole-archy)
> > is simply different levels of cosciousness and awareness
> > I also heard the Occult Hierarchy described as different levels of
> > responsibility rather than 'superiority' in the ordinary sense.
> > Beings serving in different roles and functions.
> >
> > With knowledge inevitably comes power and with Occult knowledge
> > comes Occult power.
> > If knowledge is misused it becomes dangerous both oneself and to
> > others.
> > We are told that with the light the shadow follows with equal
> > potential.
> > Until a certain degree of initiation is reached we can "fall" and
> > instead of manifesting Cosmic Harmony, work against that process.
> >
> > My understanding is Evolution is ongoing even the Chohans are an
> > evolving beings.
> > As are the `highest' planetary spirits...
> > The Secret doctrine speaks of this Solar manvantara only in our
> > dimention of consciousness.
> >
> > My understanding is there are different degrees of Adept, Manas
> > being the principle to be fully Self realised at our human stage.
> > The Mahatmas apparently slowed down their own progress and also
> > would be karmically accountable for the information they released as
> > this information is power bestowing, it can fall either side good or
> > bad.
> >
> > The Mahatma saying "the less such "idiots" hear of our teachings the
> > better in relation to the said quote.
> > To me was out of concern for humanity as a whole as misuse of the
> > powers that could and can be developed without the necessary ethical
> > development could do more harm than good.
> > This also ties in with why HPB kept warning of the dangers
> > of "disfigured teachings" that encourage reckless development of
> > psychic abilities used for selfish ends only.
> >
> > The passage below to me is related to the reason the Mahatma's did
> > not want to encourage blind following or worship of gods of any kind
> > as that would be the opposite to what they were hoping would result
> > from the release of this information.
> >
> > "Faith in the Gods and God, and other superstitions attracts
> > millions of foreign influences, living entities and powerful agents
> > around them, with which we would have to use more than ordinary
> > exercise of power to drive them away. We do not choose to do so. We
> > do not find it either necessary or profitable to lose our time
> > waging war to the unprogressed Planetaries who delight in
> > personating gods and sometimes well known characters who have lived
> > on earth. There are Dhyan-Chohans and "Chohans of Darkness," not
> > what they term devils but imperfect "Intelligences" who have never
> > been born on this or any other earth or sphere no more than
> > the "Dhyan Chohans" have and who will never belong to the "builders
> > of the Universe," the pure Planetary Intelligences, who preside at
> > every Manvantara while the Dark Chohans preside at the Pralayas.
> > Explain this to Mr. Sinnett (I CAN'T) -- tell him to read over what
> > I said to them in the few things I have explained to Mr. Hume; and
> > let him remember that as all in this universe is contrast (I cannot
> > translate it better) so the light of the Dhyan Chohans and their
> > pure intelligence is contrasted by the "Ma-Mo Chohans" -- and their
> > destructive intelligence. These are the gods the Hindus and
> > Christians and Mahomed and all others of bigoted religions and sects
> > worship; and so long as their influence is upon their devotees we
> > would no more think of associating with or counteracting them in
> > their work than we do the Red-Caps on earth whose evil results we
> > try to palliate but whose work we have no right to meddle with so
> > long as they do not cross our path. (You will not understand this, I
> > suppose. But think well over it and you will. M. means here, that
> > they have no right or even power to go against the natural or that
> > work which is prescribed to each class of beings or existing things
> > by the law of nature. The Brothers, for instance could prolong life
> > but they could not destroy death, not even for themselves. They can
> > to a degree palliate evil and relieve suffering; they could not
> > destroy evil. No more can the Dhyan Chohans impede the work of the
> > Mamo Chohans, for their Law is darkness, ignorance, destruction
> > etc., as that of the former is Light, knowledge and creation. The
> > Dhyan Chohans answer to Buddh, Divine Wisdom and Life in blissful
> > knowledge, and the Ma-mos are the personification in nature of
> > Shiva, Jehovah and other invented monsters with Ignorance at their
> > tail).
> >
> > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-134.htm
> >
> >
> >
> > Perry
> >
> >
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell"
> > <danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:
> > > Bill wrote a post on July 27 which can be read at:
> > >
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/17530
> > >
> > > I thought he brought up some good issues and was hoping
> > > that a few readers might pursue these issues
> > > in greater detail on this forum but as far as I know,
> > > no one even said "boo" about Bill's points.
> > >
> > > I call attention again to his post and the
> > > points he made.
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > > http://hpb.cc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>