Questions about the Soul

[tychomorpheus]

Hi,

The problem in the original post by Amergin is the endless confrontation between evolution and creation. It is by taking the creation word by word without interpretation that bring up questions such as which "homo X" got the first immortal soul. To what use can we put this question regarding the soul? It might be a question about man's mission, the creation's goal but if we find out exactly which evolutionary stage had the first immortal soul, what does that tell us about the soul?

However the genesis is a metaphor, a revelation, it is divine information degraded in order to fit the limits of the mind of the receptacle. To almost any bible metaphor there are many answers possible, but only one individual belief.

So, now the "maybes":
- maybe the human evolution was simply the generation of a body fit enogh to support the interaction with the human soul, so only the homo we are is capable of support the immortal soul.
- maybe all humans and animals have immortal souls and they incarnate according to the vibration of this immortal soul, some as dogs some as frogs some as man.
- maybe the Soul is a facet of God, so there is no One soul, but One soul that encompases them all
- _add here others_

I think that what Amergin tried is to undo the logic of the soul by bringing up reasonable deductions. But metaphors and reasonable deductions are not compatible.

Metaphors are compatible to epiphanies, that is when you "feel" you found Your interpretation of the metaphor, that inside feeling of finding the truth.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Amergin —

Instead of the soul preceding the life process, I think it is the life consciousness, cognition, emotion/love, memory, personality, desires for learning, desire for pleasure, guide the biological body that generates the soul in protecting that body.

I think the soul emerges through the life, and the life flows from the soul. Can I say the two are contemporaneous, even synonymous?

I suppose the emphasis, for me, is upon this life, not life in general, but the life of the acting person ... I think the person is more than the sum of all its parts, but I think the soul, without waxing too lyrical, bears the impression or blueprint of the person, rather than being purely the blueprint of the biological life form.

Pushing an analogy perhaps unfairly, if one looks at 'life' in general as a 'wave', then the wave 'collapses' into a soul ... so whilst the individual organism can be seen to 'produce' the soul from the ground up, there is a contrary argument that the wave informs the soul, and this is the realm of metaphysical investigation and religious intuition.

So I am saying that life can be potentially everything and anything, but in any given life, it 'collapses' into a particularity, the potentiality to be of that particular person, and this potentiality is the soul, which shapes, and is shaped, by the way it manifests in the world, its materiality.

If I ring you up on the phone, and you hear my voice. It is not actually my voice. It is electromagnetic waves...

That rings a number of bells! (oh dear ... )
I am thinking of the Platonic notions of forms and ideas, and the neuroscience finds of left/right hemisphere working ... that data is picked up by the senses, converted into signals, transmitted to the brain, which reconstructs the universe accordingly ...
I am also thinking that QM says that nothing is ever lost ... that subatomic changes here have impact on the other side of the cosmos ... that Elvis is alive and well, and performing somewhere...

That would require us to draw a line separating the first human baby born to a pre-human mother and father.

Then I haven't explained it properly, for, as you say, can we draw a line between what is effective this human species and that one? It's a dynamic of emergence, rather than a series of isolated steps ...

(... the right hemisphere sees dynamism and flow, the left breaks it down into manageable 'moments' ...)

I think life is a continuum that began with bacteria that formed by yet unknown mechanisms about 4 billion years ago.

Agreed.

I doubt that a line can be drawn separating two consecutive hominids.

Nor their souls — but they are different.

If one cannot draw such a line from the earliest proto-vertebrate Pikaia to Homo sapiens sapiens, can we even draw a line between Stromatolytes and Homo sapiens sapiens?

I suggest we don't have to.

Adam and Eve were not likely raised by a pair of Ape parents.

No. Nor formed out of mud ...

The African Grey Parrot Alex spoke in human language.

I think McGilchrist would point out that such things happen when exposed to humans, the do not arise naturally within the creature.

One could even argue that simply by expose to humans, one is accelerating the brain process within the creature. That one is 'opening the mind' of the other

Because I am not restricted in my thinking by religious belief, my mind is open to view animal communication of which I was sceptical previously.

And because I'm not restricted in my thinking by scientific belief, my mind is open to view consciousness as more than the byproduct of an electro-chemical process. Touché! (and I am joking... )

God bless,

Thomas

 

[taijasi]

Hi Taijasi —

Personally I think the notion of reincarnation becomes more and more untenable the more we understand about who and what we are — but that's the way I construe things at present.

Naturally you will hold to what you find most tenable [how's that for redundancy!] ... and so will I. That's why, since I find nowhere else in Nature that cycles do not govern, neither in the Macrocosm nor in the micro, I should expect the ways of Heaven to be no different. Here I hold to the Hermetic Axiom: As Above, So Below, As Within, So Without. Consider this one of my a prioris ...

But the primary issue for me is that the soul does not deliver itself up to easy categorisation — I don't think the soul is a 'thing' so much as a dynamic.

Categorization by whom? By you and I? Of course not. You and I have not yet attained to the Consciousness of SOUL. Or, more accurately, even to whatever degree we may be aware of such, we do not yet have FULL Consciousness AS Soul. One need not reach Buddhahood, or even to Asekha Adept status [5th Degree Initiation] for such a degree of self-mastery. Yet no Adept or Arhat would question the Mystical and Occult nature of Christ's statement in John 4:16 as relevant here.

Do we understand, then, the relationship of the Principle, CHRISTOS, to the man Jesus of Nazareth, or of same to any of the other Eastern or Western Adepts? For They, just as the Nazarene, have *incarnated* this, taught us much regarding Soul ... and helped Guide us on the Path of Self-Mastery and Self-Understanding. Even so, first and foremost, WHOM and WHAT is it from Whom and which we receive our Guidance, our Understanding and our Illumination? In the Ageless Wisdom, this [the foremost Teacher] is SOUL. Thus it is said: When the student is ready, the Soul will introduce him to his Master ...

Is the Soul a thing? Let's ask the question this way: Are YOU a thing? In the Ageless Wisdom teachings, Soul is a PRINCIPLE of our Being, therefore not a `thing' at all, but very much a dynamic. Further, it exists upon every level, be that physical, astro-mental, or upon the `Higher' planes, those of the Spiritual Triad [Atma-Buddhi-Manas].

Now, we may quibble with the terminology, and compare a prioris; but this becomes a matter of semantics. You may certainly dismiss with all of these *levels* ... and in a wholistic, synthetic understanding this becomes useful. In terms of Self-Mastery, however, which includes contact with, then function AS the Solar Principle ... I think you'll find those levels come in fairly handy. Plato did. Descartes did. Have you rendered their systems and observations superfluous? If so, do - pray tell - how?

I am often advised (by those who know me best) to SIMPLIFY. Even inasmuch as I am looking for common ground with you here, Thomas, I welcome advice along these lines ... IF we have the same, or a close enough rapport. It does no good, however, if that is strictly on your terms (so to speak, meaning USING your terms) ~ or of course, mine. Thus, in almost every case where headway is made, there is compromise.

Moving on ...

At ground, according to Scripture, 'soul' and 'life' are synonymous (nephesh). Furthermore everything in the cosmos is created, but the soul is not created in the same way, it is breathed (ruach, neshamah)into a created thing.

Alright. And can we keep our Yggdrasil firmly rooted in the proper orientation, and thus acknowledge some naturally following conclusions about the nature of the world around us ... and within, etc? F'r instance, while I quite agree, I will not abandon the following a prioris:

From the Zohar, we read:

"The Breath becomes a stone; the stone, a plant; the plant, an animal; the animal, a man; the man, a spirit; and the spirit, a god."​

And from The Code of Manu:

"The first germ of life was developed by water and heat" (Manu, book i., sloka 8).

"Water ascends toward the sky in vapors; from the sun it descends in rain, from the rain are born the plants, and from the plants, animals" (book iii., sloka 76).

"Each being acquires the qualities of the one which immediately precedes it, in such a manner that the farther a being gets away from the primal atom of its series, the more he is possessed of qualities and perfections" (book i., sloka 20).

"Man will traverse the universe, gradually ascending, and passing through the rocks, the plants, the worms, insects, fish, serpents, tortoises, wild animals, cattle, and higher animals. . . . Such is the inferior degree" (Ibid.).

"These are the transformations declared, from the plant up to Brahma, which have to take place in his world" (Ibid.).​

Notice a parallel?

BREATH? You mean, Macrocosmically, that thing [dynamic] going back to ... the very first words of the Pentateuch? With its parallel in the recapitulatory, mystical Gospel of John? THAT which, within our tiny little microcosmic reflection has fallen into generation, passing through each of these various Kingdoms, through long, long ages ... and, admittedly, much hardship and trouble (of late), at least with respect to the HUMAN stage?

You said "NOT CREATED." Care to compare?

From The Secret Doctrine:

"The term Anupadaka, 'parentless,' or without progenitors, is a mystical designation having several meanings in the philosophy. By this name celestial beings, the Dhyan-Chohans or Dhyani-Buddhas, are generally meant. But as these correspond mystically to the human Buddhas and Bodhisattwas, known as the 'Manushi (or human) Buddhas,' the latter are also designated 'Anupadaka,' once that their whole personality is merged in their compound sixth and seventh principles — or Atma-Buddhi, and that they have become the 'diamond-souled' (Vajra-sattvas), the full Mahatmas. . . . The mystery in the hierarchy of the Anupadaka is great, its apex being the universal Spirit-Soul, and the lower rung the Manushi-Buddha; and even every Soul-endowed man is an Anupadaka in a latent state. Hence, when speaking of the Universe in its formless, eternal, or absolute condition, before it was fashioned by the 'Builders' — the expression, 'the Universe was Anupadaka' " (SD 1:52).​

For me the soul is not a fixed nature either, the soul does not evolve as natures do — in time and linearly. Rather the soul 'grows' or shrinks by participation (or lack thereof), and in a very special way — the soul participates in the being of that which it participates in.

I can quite agree, although I do not believe the Soul ever shrinks. Not in an ontological sense, unless we are referring to the 4th Initiation, which is one of [lower] self-immolation, or self-sacrifice, as experienced by Jesus of Nazareth in the Crucifixion account. We understand this but little, of necessity, given our relative stage on the spiritual path. But here, I do believe we fairly well BECOME our Soul, in the sense that there is no longer an intermediary. Thus we do, literally, directly incarnate The Divine. [This, as we know, is indicated in Scripture, both Hebrew and New Testament, and especially by Christ's direct Teaching in the latter.]

This does not mean we become truly soulless; yet it does indicate that the [man] at this stage ACTIVELY incarnates this 2nd Principle of his own Being (the Spiritual Triad). No longer is Nature [God] doing the greatest part of the work for him ... which you term, GRACE. The latter gift has been accepted fully, its natural conclusion reaped both within time & space and, more importantly, transcendent OF TSI [Time-Space Illusion], at least partly by the act of transcendence itself ... yet more by his own self-sacrifice, in the highest sense (combined with Love, plus Knowledge). And of course, these are not mutually exclusive attainments, activities, evolutions, etc.

The soul is not by nature eternal, nor by nature immortal, nor by nature divine (although it can become so, by participation) the soul comes into being and has a beginning in time, and the possibility of extinction (by participation in the unreal, which exhausts it).

Here I disagree. Conditionally eternal and immortal I would be willing to compromise, yet this is not the Soul I believe in. Modern Christianity may teach us such, but Christ never did. Even the Buddha, in His doctrine of anatta - so misunderstood in the West - did not deny the Soul, or an Atman, and its relative permanence. But Buddhism emphasizes the Dharma, and even the Soul, once it has fulfilled its Dharma relative to the [current] human kingdom, must `graduate' to perform a higher one, elsewhere in the Universe.

So, too, with human beings ... on our little globe, as on any globe at our stage of evolution. For it is taught that ALL BEINGS in Cosmos either ARE, have been or shall pass through ~ a stage approximating what we call HUMAN. And this means that highest Spirit, and lowest matter, are unified by Consciousness [or Intellect] as an Intermediary.

If we disagree upon this fundamental, this a priori, then we are on such a different footing to begin with ... that it is better to turn to the points of our agreement. For no amount of argument could convince me otherwise. As I sit, typing this, just as you sit reading it, I am as sure of the Presence [sic] of SOUL Principle as I am of anything ... yet I am far more certain of that Principle than I am of what I see and hear around me, or have come to BELIEVE to be true. For without Soul, not even `accurate' sensory perception, or the most [potentially] wonderfully useful bit of information, matters in the least. It needs a CONTEXT ... and a simple *container* [my material form, including both sensory apparatus, brain, and even mind] will not suffice.

SOUL, then, is all potential to me/us as a human being. Or in the very least, it is THE doorway to such. But it is not inanimate, and as you say, it is no `thing.'

But above all I do not view the soul as a 'thing' as such, it's more a dynamic, a nexus ... certainly one can say 'my soul', and the soul is intimately and inextricably entwined with the idea of the person. (This is why we do not believe in reincarnation — for us a reincarnated soul — which is the ground of one's individual being — would necessarily manifest the same person as before, not a different one.)

The soul is one, what seeks to possess or rather entrap the soul is legion.

I do not follow your logic whatsoever regarding rebirth. You seem to think that the very ground of your being is static, one-dimensional, and perhaps like a video on your television that has been frozen. Or even a musical note that has been sustained. To me, dynamism not only suggests, it REQUIRES change.

[The Soul may exhibit] Permanence, a Firmament, solidity RELATIVE TO the physical, emotional and lower mental planes, yet Thomas, it is not you or I whom & which reincarnate. That is why you remember nothing ... yet.

Surely if the Soul is the GROUND of our Being, then YOU are not ontologically superior to this Ground. [Call it not `God' or even `a god' lest you become a heretic, but at least acknowledge the error. WE are not superior to our Soul. If you believe otherwise, then indeed, we are back to semantics again. Sure, the Soul may belong to a superior Order in the Angelic Hierarchies. I am familiar in my studies with TWELVE such ... although Five are Ascended, and some are fairly well beyond our ken. But even if we +plus our Souls+ currently find ourselves near the bottom of this LADDER, I think Jacob referred to "the angels of God ascending and descending on it."

Modern Christianity may exclude Humanity from the Orders of Angels altogether; adherents of the Wisdom Tradition do not, whether of Kabbalistic inclination or otherwise. We regard the lowest orders of these angels, the inferior hebdomad or infernal deities, as co-constructing the world(s) we inhabit ... quite literally. This means we are of a compound nature, from material, up through Soul, even into Highest Heaven. But there we touch the Greater Hebdomad and Superior Orders, however near to Ascension & abstraction These may be.

You see? It may sound like having your cake & eating it too, Thomas, but if God's world [Cosmos] worked any other way, I wouldn't much care to be a part of it. Humility isn't the issue, if all we have to do is discover some exact, rigid placement within an UNchanging, STATIC hierarchy. You see? That don't fly with me. Either we are ascending and - relatively - descending along Jacob's Ladder ... or the Hiranyagarbha falls apart. And then you've just got yolk all over yer face. Aw man, that's no fun! ]

~~

As for left- & right-brain, there can be other correlations made with the eyes, as is done in the Wisdom Teachings. How about:

If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.​

Beginning by visualizing clearly what it is we're interested in helping God to co-create ... seems like a Good idea.

See how it comes back to a prioris? If I know you well enough, I can already anticipate one possible, if not likely, response. Surprise me!

Again — language is left hemisphere, but meaning is right hemisphere ... were you and I 'eye to eye' we would read and understand each other much better, I think, the written word is really a very, very poor means of transmitting ideas, hence the tendency to misunderstanding.

Definitely ... so part of the challenge is learning to translate, and speak as if. This, too, can be done in the context of speaking/expressing as if I were more fully or directly incarnating Soul Purpose, Soul Intention.

Try the following brief read when you get a chance. I stumbled upon it just now in a search for `Soul qualities' ... Alice Bailey and The Inner Nature of Man

 

[Thomas]

Hi Taijasi —
I am still open to discussing what 'reincarnates', but as I see it currently, it's the nature, not the person ... the universal, not the particular. So the question before all, for me, is what is it you say that reincarnates?

Categorization by whom? By you and I? Of course not.

But, my dear Taijasi — that's what Theosophy does, it categorizes everything!

You and I have not yet attained to the Consciousness of SOUL.

Well one must have some consciousness of soul, otherwise one would not be conscious of the self.

I would say, from my Christian perspective, that the soul is not complete until it is in harmony with all other souls ... it's good lies in itself, as existing, and in others, as communicative, so the soul is outward-facing.

... or even to Asekha Adept status [5th Degree Initiation]...

See ... categories. This opens up a whole raft of inquiry:
The first is that categorising 'fixes' things. It 'abstracts' things from their context, so what you're left with, as a category, is somewhat 2-dimensional.

If you're going to categorise by degree, then you necessarily must have the whole picture in view ... and as the cosmos is constantly in flux, you can't.

Once man thinks he knows all the answers, he's living in his own world, not the real one. As someone said, the one saving grace of all philosophy is that it knows there is far more than it knows ...

By taking the things categorised out of their real, lived and authentic context, everything becomes the same, all things in given categories become interchangeable, as if you could take one person out of a social situation, put another person in, and nothing would change.
This, common sense and experience tells us, is just not true.

As the Daoists say, 'The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tau' — so classification, even much-prixed esoteric knowledge, is nothing in itself, compared to what is. The 'true Tao' is experienced in the living moment, it cannot be captured or contained, but experienced.

for such a degree of self-mastery.

I think the concept of 'self mastery' is flawed. Self-mastery necessarily involves control of self, and the control of the environment in which the self lives and moves, because the self is part of the landscape, as it were, we are not separate from it. Self-mastery is the will-to-power, and invariably the cause of all man's ills.

Do we understand, then, the relationship of the Principle, CHRISTOS, to the man Jesus of Nazareth, or of same to any of the other Eastern or Western Adepts?

Well for one, I think you're making a massive and unfounded generalisation about what these 'Adepts' are supposed to agree on.
For my part, I'm pretty sure we don't agree.

For They, just as the Nazarene, have *incarnated* this,

I think Jesus incorporates far more than that. He is not an aspect of the Logos embodied, He is the embodiment of the Logos — the distinction is everything.

... and helped Guide us on the Path of Self-Mastery and Self-Understanding.

See? Jesus didn't teach that at all — He taught 'without me you can do nothing' (John 15:5), deploying the metaphor of the vine — he taught that no man is an island, but rather the way to Union is through Co-(m)-union ... not individual power, but back the way we came. See my note about self mastery, above. It's an illusion, and a costly one ... it can cost you your soul, as Jesus also taught.

Jesus said 'follow me' when He called His disciples ... in fact, in all three Synpotic accounts, Jesus says to the rich young man: "If thou wilt be perfect ... and come follow me" — the journey is ongoing, and whenever and wherever we find ourselves, Jesus will be there saying 'follow me' ...

Jesus cannot be contained in any system men can dream up. The riches of the young man refers to everything we know ... in effect, to follow Jesus we 'leave ourselves behind' ...

In the Ageless Wisdom, this [the foremost Teacher] is SOUL.

Well how that is translated depends on who's 'ageless wisdom' you're talking about.

For me, wisdom is timeless, not because it is eternal, but because it is ephemeral. Wisdom is in the moment, it's doing just the right thing at just the right time, and that means living in the moment ... not doing what one did yesterday, not doing what one thinks one should do in moments like this, because there are no 'moments like this' every moment is unique, individual, a one-time event, and wisdom is the spontaneous product of we and it.

Wisdom, when it passes into memory, becomes knowledge, and is a guide and a utility, but we know very knowledgeable men who are not wise, and very wise men who are not knowledgeable.

Is the Soul a thing? Let's ask the question this way: Are YOU a thing?

Well, we're not nothing, are we?

In the Ageless Wisdom teachings, Soul is a PRINCIPLE of our Being, therefore not a `thing' at all, but very much a dynamic.

Which is what I said above, but I don't need to refer to some 'Ageless Wisdom' teaching to work that out. But dynamism is a quality of a thing, dynamics don't exist apart from entities. If a principle is dynamic, then dynamism is a quality of that principle, and even principles are 'things'.

Now, we may quibble with the terminology, and compare a prioris; but this becomes a matter of semantics.

Not really ... it can be a matter of error.

You may certainly dismiss with all of these *levels* ... and in a wholistic, synthetic understanding this becomes useful.

Well, that depends. A 'holistic, synthetic understanding' of 'all in all' is where I'm headed ... not into the granulation of levels ...

In terms of Self-Mastery, however ...

See above ...

I think you'll find those levels come in fairly handy. Plato did. Descartes did. Have you rendered their systems and observations superfluous? If so, do - pray tell - how?

I'm looking beyond them. Plato also knew something about the real esoteric ...

'Esoteric' itself has two meanings. One refers to “inward”, “private”, “occult”, “hidden” or “mysterious”. On this basis, the Christian sacramental system is esoteric; or was originally so conceived. The other means “of an elaborate and far-fetched character”. On this basis much of modern theoretical physics is thoroughly esoteric.

What Plato wrote in his Seventh Letter is important. It is not certain that the text as we have it is authentic, however I will take it to be so, for the sake of the argument. In it Plato writes that he has never written anything about “the problems with which I am concerned” [“Epistle VII” (341c)] and adds that he “never will do so”:

For this knowledge is not something that can be put into words like other sciences; but after long-continued intercourse between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly, like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the soul and straightway nourishes itself. [“Epistle VII” (341c)]

This is the true esoteric teaching — it's a lived experience, a breakthrough, it is a bodily experience.

I am often advised (by those who know me best) to SIMPLIFY.

That is the way I now want to go. It's taken me half a century to realise, the more complex it is, the less likely it is to be the case.

There is a place for the esoteric, but soon it becomes an end in itself, and then you're into ever-increasing complexity, the schemata growing ever bigger, and each category breaks down into its subcategories, ad infinitum. It's dazzling, and beguiling, and a glamour ... meanwhile the real, the true and the beautiful recedes into the distance.

From the Zohar, we read:

"The Breath becomes a stone; the stone, a plant; the plant, an animal; the animal, a man; the man, a spirit; and the spirit, a god."​

Well, I disagree.
For one, it assumes a natural progression from matter to spirit, which is not the case, and from spirit to God, which is not the case either.
For another, this supposes the animate evolves out of the inanimate.
For another, this renders things the sum of their parts, which I do not agree to be the case (as all nature demonstrates, the whole is greater than the sum).
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the Zohar, just the context it's deployed in here.

"Man will traverse the universe, gradually ascending, and passing through the rocks, the plants, the worms, insects, fish, serpents, tortoises, wild animals, cattle, and higher animals. . . . Such is the inferior degree" (Ibid.).

No, I think the point is not to traverse the universe horizontally, but ascend vertically. In so doing, he encompasses all that is below him, and brings it with him. The is the 'secret' of the Sacrament of the Mass, hinted at by de Chardin but not quite grasped in its fulness. All that is lower is in the genetic structure of man (a very clever system), assumed to be evolutionary detritus, but perhaps far from the case.

As man becomes spiritualised, so do the flora, fauna, and mineral worlds, through him. That was always his job, to tend to a theophany and work in, with, by and through it, to bring it to the fruition that it will be.

I can quite agree, although I do not believe the Soul ever shrinks.{/quote]
I do.
"And he saith to them: My soul is sorrowful even unto death; stay you here, and watch." Mark 14:34
"And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord." Luke 1:46

But here, I do believe we fairly well BECOME our Soul, in the sense that there is no longer an intermediary.

You soul is your life, how can you 'become' your life, how can your life intermediate?

Thus we do, literally, directly incarnate The Divine. [This, as we know, is indicated in Scripture, both Hebrew and New Testament, and especially by Christ's direct Teaching in the latter.]

No, you've got that wrong, too.

This does not mean we become truly soulless; yet it does indicate that the [man] at this stage ACTIVELY incarnates this 2nd Principle of his own Being (the Spiritual Triad).

This is esoteric gobbdegook to me. A soulless man is a lifeless man ... he's dead.

Here I disagree. Conditionally eternal and immortal I would be willing to compromise, yet this is not the Soul I believe in. Modern Christianity may teach us such, but Christ never did.

Yes he did. "And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28.

For it is taught that ALL BEINGS in Cosmos either ARE, have been or shall pass through ~ a stage approximating what we call HUMAN. And this means that highest Spirit, and lowest matter, are unified by Consciousness [or Intellect] as an Intermediary.

I disagree. It also means the the end will never be realised, that you've entered a system of infinite regress, for every atom to experience every atom in time and space is not possible, for as much as you experience, others are also experiencing, so you can never attain to the full experience. You would go on forever, and not advance one single step.

It needs a CONTEXT ... and a simple *container* [my material form, including both sensory apparatus, brain, and even mind] will not suffice.

EXACTLY!!! And that context is physicality, a lived life, the experience of life ... not systems, not structures, not categories ... not even a periodic table of every state and domain of being would equate to one millisecond's actual, authentic, lived experience.

In fact, all that 'knowledge' will just get in the way, because it assumes it knows, whereas true wisdom is that of a child, who embraces the moment without preconception, but pure delight.

I do not follow your logic whatsoever regarding rebirth.

It's another system of infinite regress ... no matter how many times man is born, he will never be perfect, because his perfection lies not in himself, but in the fraternity of all life.

Surely if the Soul is the GROUND of our Being, then YOU are not ontologically superior to this Ground.

It's the subsistent ground, but it is not it's own ground, as it were ... that's God, that's what Meister Eckhart was talking about.

WE are not superior to our Soul.

We are our soul ... how can we be superior to our own lives?

Sure, the Soul may belong to a superior Order in the Angelic Hierarchies.

No, don't believe that for a moment. We're back into abstractions again ... of categories of thing with no actuality.

Life is universal, soul refers to an instance, a living being.

Either we are ascending and - relatively - descending along Jacob's Ladder ... or the Hiranyagarbha falls apart. And then you've just got yolk all over yer face. Aw man, that's no fun! ]

I would say the angelic ascent and descent is the order of experience, of give and take ... I think the ladder is the body.

As for left- & right-brain, there can be other correlations made with the eyes, as is done in the Wisdom Teachings. How about:

If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.​

OK. Then that means dispense with all your knowledge, and esoterica, and what have you ... and get out there and live!

God bless,

Thomas

 

[taijasi]

On further reflection I think the best glimpse Hollywood has given us in a long time of the Soul can be found in `The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.' A close second would be Alegria, featuring Cirque du Soleil, but this seems to be a category unto itself. Or, as you view it Thomas, it needs none.

Agreed, the tendency of the mind to categorize is discussed by Patanjali, mastered in Raja Yoga and finally set aside by the disciple on the Path. With this, the Soul has everything to do.

More later.

~A

 

[Amergin]

Hi,

The problem in the original post by Amergin is the endless confrontation between evolution and creation. It is by taking the creation word by word without interpretation that bring up questions such as which "homo X" got the first immortal soul. To what use can we put this question regarding the soul? It might be a question about man's mission, the creation's goal but if we find out exactly which evolutionary stage had the first immortal soul, what does that tell us about the soul?

Tych, evolution does not conflict with creation. Evolution would not happen if creation did not happen. Evolution is a fact to scientists like me. The evidence is so compelling and observable that denial is just a mental block defence mechanism of the religious fundamentalist. Creation is different. It is the origin of the universe and perhaps the origin of the first biological molecules that could reproduce (life.) As far as we know, it took the universe 13.5 billion years to expand energy, combine particles into atoms, make elements in the primordial giant stars, and billions of years for our Solar system to form in a dust and ice cloud. Planets formed in varying distance from the newly forming Sun. The odds were that at least one would revolve in the Goldilocks Zone that could permit the development of living molecules and cells, and us. If you toss 100 ping-pong balls into a four square meter room, one or more will be within a 500 cm radius of room centre. Earth accreted just far enough from the Sun and not too far so liquid water could exist, and viable temperature.

However the genesis is a metaphor, a revelation, it is divine information degraded in order to fit the limits of the mind of the receptacle. To almost any bible metaphor there are many answers possible, but only one individual belief.

I can understand why theists make Genesis into a metaphor. It is equally arguable that it was believed by savage Stone Age humans to be literal. Literally, Genesis is wrong. There are two different Genesis myths because two different Jewish set of tribes had made up different literal genesis myths. I think the metaphor is what modern humans regard the Biblical Myths in order to maintain their theistic belief... and the most important delusion, is immortality. Fear of death makes the metaphor a protection from that dreaded end of life. The same area of the brain, the right temporal lobe that conceives of this fear emotion is the same region responsible for God belief (as experienced in Partial Complex Epilepsy in which God is experienced as well as mystical feeling, out of body experience, and oneness with the cosmos.) Using Transcortical Magnetic Stimulation can generate these in volunteer patients.

So, now the "maybes":
- maybe the human evolution was simply the generation of a body fit enogh to support the interaction with the human soul, so only the homo we are is capable of support the immortal soul.

Therefore, the first Homo born to Australopithecus parents had a soul, which Mum and Pa lackedJ

The human brain generates what we call the soul and all of its functions. One must assume that non-human animals with brains close to ours may also generate a soul...why not? Assuming that only our brains can generate (support) a soul seems a bit arrogant and grandiose on our part. I am an animal. I am not a pseudo-god. I find no evidence of a little homunculus of spirit leaves my brain at death to go somewhere else.

- maybe all humans and animals have immortal souls and they incarnate according to the vibration of this immortal soul, some as dogs some as frogs some as man.

That sounds fairer. Nevertheless, I ask why postulate a soul at all. There is no evidence for it. All of the soul's functions can be now explained by neuroscience of the brain.

- maybe the Soul is a facet of God, so there is no One soul, but One soul that encompases them all
- _add here others_

Again, why do we need to postulate a soul? Why do we need to postulate a soul of the cosmos, god? I think we do quite well with the natural biological neurocircuits that make up our brains, and the universe does quite well with volumes of text on physics of the large and physics of the small (superstrings) and the probability of a unified explanation. Even now, we do not need the soul to explain any human functions and we do not need god to explain our world. People only need God to support their delusion of immortality.

I think that what Amergin tried is to undo the logic of the soul by bringing up reasonable deductions. But metaphors and reasonable deductions are not compatible.

I try to avoid the ambiguities of philosophical games of semantics. Metaphors are useful in observing actual physical phenomena but do not constitute an explanation.

Metaphors are compatible to epiphanies, that is when you "feel" you found Your interpretation of the metaphor, that inside feeling of finding the truth.

The emotional epiphanies felt when contemplating a metaphor may give you the feeling of truth. However, one's truth may be an other's heresy or myth. Seeing the face of Jesus in a piece of toasted bread or in a cloud formation are much less convincing if one takes a sceptical look.

I once had such a "feeling" when on East Orkney Island; I sat south of the 4500-year-old stone village of Skara Brae. I saw the Northern Lights dancing in beauty and reflected on the calm waters of the bay beyond Skara Brae and a slight reflection on the stone ruins. I had the feeling but in my rational half of the brain, it was just a coincidence of natural events in a beautiful part of my native country.

Amergin

 

[taijasi]

Thomas, I told you a reply was forthcoming:

Hi Taijasi —
I am still open to discussing what 'reincarnates', but as I see it currently, it's the nature, not the person ... the universal, not the particular. So the question before all, for me, is what is it you say that reincarnates?

I say no different than philosophers, Gnostics, mystics, spiritualists, Vedantists, and Theosophists of all times.

I affirm that I have a body, but I am not that body.
I affirm that I have emotions, but I am not those emotions.
I affirm that I have a mind, but I am not that mind.

What this leaves, transcendent of form, is Consciousness. There are still vehicles for this Consciousness, and in my highest duality I am Atma(n), using the Buddhic vehicle. The points for discussion, as on another, similar thread, may focus on the distinction between ATMA and Atman.

However, there are differences between Buddhi-Taijasi and Manas-Taijasi, and this too should be considered. The Immortal, reincarnating Ego {Higher Ego, from the Latin, which term 19th Century Theosophy coined before modern psychology or Eastern studies redefined this word} ... or Soul, resides as an entity in its own right upon the higher mental plane.

From there, a Triune focus of Will, Love-Wisdom and Active Intellect inform the lower, threefold personality. The `I-maker' Principle of Consciousness, as it is called, is Ahamkara ... and this is understood in Advaita Vedanta as follows:

"In its lower aspect, the egoistical and mayavi principle, born of avidya (ignorance), which produces the notion of the personal ego as being different from the universal self."

~ Encyclopedic Theosophical Glossary
​

But, my dear Taijasi — that's what Theosophy does, it categorizes everything!

Yes, Theosophy is not for those who seek easy answers.

First one must learn something about the stage of `pure quietude' referred to in the Raja Yoga of Patanjali. The sincere student learns mental discipline, which requires for its preliminary the gradual re-polarization of consciousness out of the emotional body into the mental. This alone can require several lifetimes of meditative practice (!) ... yet the real work cannot properly begin until the foundation is laid!

Categorization, in the form of Viveka, proper discernment, will be necessary when undertaking a study of subtle metaphysical matters. Otherwise, how do we know what it is we've fixed our conscious attention upon?

What, you would dismiss with the jagrat, svapna, sushupti and turiya states of Yogic awareness, simply because these categories are not familiar? I cannot see how you then proceed to understand our human constitution. You may very well consider some of what I'm saying as a priori, but if you simply ask I will be glad to tell you which is that, and which is based directly on some type of ~ experience.

For example, I cannot speak with any real authority or extensive familiarity regarding these Yogic states. What I can tell you, however, beyond a shadow of a doubt... is that it is the `Real Self' which has subjected itself to these various conditioned states of awareness, or Consciousness.

Buddhism emphasizes that conditioned being is what we are trying to understand [as illusory, inasmuch as it leads us to false conclusions regarding the ULTIMATE nature of things], in order to TRANSCEND, as you seem to already recognize. There are many paths to arrive at this same result, and I have never questioned that Christianity is among the world's great religions ~ being the Path par excellence for a certain mentality, for Souls (as well as personalities) of a certain disposition. It has its exemplars, yet it is entirely unsuited and unsuitable for many others.

The physical plane is, for us, the plane of greatest illusion [maya], for herein we come to the false conclusion that Consciousness Itself - close enough to our REAL SELF [Soul] in this discussion - is separate from that of other human beings ... and animal beings, angelic beings, etc. We do not rightly grasp our proper relationship in the Great Order of Being, as it has been called, and the resulting improper self-understanding one Master has called "the dire heresy of separateness."

[False identification of the ego, or personality awareness with its upadhi, the dense physical body, is itself a considerable obstacle in understanding the nature of self, Consciousness, Soul and thus ~ the Divine.]

Categorizations will become useful, again, if we wish to gain an accurate picture of our relationship to all other beings [and we can keep it simple by focusing on other humans for now] ... upon the astral and lower mental planes ... but in order to understand what reincarnates we must visit Christ's allegory of The Prodigal, wherein that question is appropriately answered.

We can study specific passages regarding reincarnation by looking directly to New Testament Scripture ... Revelation, Ephesians, the Gospels, plus certain commentaries or concordances. I have an interest in this, but not in getting bogged down if one is unwilling to see the parallels to a doctrine which has been universally preached for millions of years upon this planet [and of course, others].

This naturally raises the issue of what one is willing to consider as evidence, testimony or authoritative source material when it comes to religious or spiritual teaching [note the *thread topic*] ... but an alternative approach, or at least a parallel, is to speak from one's own experience. This can provide for better discussion anyway, but it DOES require a common enough worldview or shared set of assumptions, a prioris, etc. If you think we have that, then we may be able to discuss the matter. I suppose we'll see ...

I would say, from my Christian perspective, that the soul is not complete until it is in harmony with all other souls ... it's good lies in itself, as existing, and in others, as communicative, so the soul is outward-facing.

Yes, I can see this. The Soul in modern Theosophical thought, however, is a being unto itself. It is, simply put, a mostly perfected human being of a previous round of evolution. It has, to a certain high degree, attained its liberation ... and thus does not incarnate into the worlds of form at all. Rather, it is a threefold entity, whose parallel to our own threefold state exists on a higher turn of the spiral, and for it, the equivalent of the physical plane & body is the Higher Mental. THERE is where the spiritual Soul "incarnates" ... the way I understand it.

So the Soul already exists in a state transcendent of human suffering and transgression [`sin'] by virtue of its having attained that state in a prior round of evolution. It is not being punished by its current condition, its relationship to us [to you, to me] by being here, now, as the `Friend of the Ages;' rather, it is making a voluntary Sacrifice, and thus making Holy something which has fallen into material incarnation in complete accordance with the Divine Plan. If this last point is disregarded, misunderstanding will naturally result ...

Such, anyway, is what I must believe, not simply based on my experience [which is true], but also because I cannot believe in a Deity of such imperfection as depicted in the common interpretations of the Eden allegory. What I CAN and must accept is that the Divine Sacrifice [the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world") finds its microcosmic mirror in my Soul and in yours. I believe it to be Universal, because God is just like that.

Regarding Adepts and Initiations ...

See ... categories. This opens up a whole raft of inquiry:
The first is that categorising 'fixes' things. It 'abstracts' things from their context, so what you're left with, as a category, is somewhat 2-dimensional.

Oh yes. We are left to find enough example to either prove, or disprove, every hypothesis. In my life, sufficiently for me, I have proven what I need to on this matter. For you, it may be otherwise ... yet you have proven something else, however similar or dissimilar. I can probably address this more directly, but I do agree that we have to have specifics if we wish to come to understand the Universal. It does no good to simply theorize ad infinitum.

If you're going to categorise by degree, then you necessarily must have the whole picture in view ... and as the cosmos is constantly in flux, you can't.

Not so, not so. Think about the fractal, and ask yourself what it is that is repeating. If the PATTERN is what we're trying to understand, don't confuse the individual or the specific with the Universal. And while it is true, as I say, that we NEED the individual to prove or demonstrate that Universal [what else was Christ than precisely this?] ... we must not mistake our world, our self, as THE EXCEPTION. This is ever where we get into trouble!

Once man thinks he knows all the answers, he's living in his own world, not the real one. As someone said, the one saving grace of all philosophy is that it knows there is far more than it knows ...

Did it ever occur that Socrates was simply trying to show us humility? That we must be ready to see the Infinite expanse, marvel at its wonder and Majesty, but not gasp at the horror of what lies BEYOND?

I do not consider myself preparing for a long, peaceful sleep. Rather, I intend to become more and more vigilant, because I know that the Way is not easy. It was not designed that way ... and it would be boring as such, at least imho. So, while there may be a few more lifetimes before I can wield the law as an advanced Initiate, I know that what I am looking forward to is CO-Creation, as an AWAKENED Being, and not a long, peaceful rest ... as a separate one.

This, the transcendence which you speak of, must become a Reality at some point, Thomas. You cannot speak of a Divine that exists transcendent of the `I-Thou,' then consider an eternality of duality. The two are incompatible. I will only meet you halfway, as far as what I have experienced and consider to be possible ... inasmuch as there is usually a BOTH-AND which solves such communication issues or misunderstandings as you and I typically have. IOW, until our AT-ONE-ment with our Soul is attained at the 4th Initiation, yes, we can imagine a deepening `I-Thou.' Yet, when God challenges YOU to yield your Individuality to God, finally and at long last ... will you? Will you be ready? Will you let go?

This is the 20 cent question, isn't it. Forget millions of dollars, pounds sterling, what-have-you. I think God wants to see what we do with what we currently have. And if Earth, like all planets, is not a giant schoolroom ~ CHRIST's Schoolroom ~ wherein we are preparing for an ETERNITY with God ... then please, count me OUT!

I know I said WITH God, rather than "as" God. Did I say I was a high Initiate at present? Alright then. But you see, one doesn't have to BE a tree, to see a tree. And one doesn't have to BE a school principal, to meet a school principal. Having met a few in my time, not to mention teachers, students, and parents of the kids I tutor, I happen to know a little about how schools work. I may not find the administrators' positions to all be equally glamorous, but in esoteric work, GLAMOUR is considered a problem anyway, rather than a fringe benefit.

What, have you never met anyone so much farther advanced than you spiritually, that you knew this as clearly as you know your own name? Have you never stood in the presence of one who - if you are honest with yourself - can see right through you, and know you for exactly who and what you are? I daresay your own wife can do this, and perhaps your children, at times.

So you see, we do not even need to be enlightened. This, as you say, is simply a testament to the presence of the [SAME] Soul within each and every one of us. But this, the World Soul, is on a much higher level, the Buddhic, or even Atma-Buddhi. Let's just keep it simple for the moment, and speak of The Temple of Solomon: The Higher Mental plane. It will be apparent in a good deal of Christian artwork as that Halo around the Intellectual Principle, inasmuch as this latter is sheathed or encased in a physical vehicle.

So, I believe in a Threefold Soul [mirroring THE Holy Trinity, on ANY level you wish to consider it, or Transcendent of them all] ... focused in a vehicle of rarified mental substance, named in the East ~ [all sorts of terminology, just pick a school of Yoga or Philosophy and I will go play fetch for you; else, let's talk Western] ... with a lesser or lower turn of the spiral, consisting of a threefold PERIODIC vehicle for this Immortal Soul:

• Mind, active in the lower mental world [etheric, gaseous, liquid and solid sub-states of matter]
• Emotional awareness, active in the astral world [4 ethers, plus gaseous, liquid and solid sub-states of matter]
• Physical etheric consciousness, brain-centered, active via the system of chakras or force-centres [7 major, 21 minor, 1000s of nadis] and nervous plexi ... [4 physical ethers]
• All of this, this THREEFOLD personality instrument, incarnate within the dense vehicle [gaseous, liquid and solid sub-states of matter, aka flesh]

Here is the relationship between little self and Greater Self which most Theosophists believe in, yet which I do think I can show you as existing in every world religion there has ever been. It cannot be other, unless God forsakes His people ... or unless illusion, falsehood and unrighteousness triumph over Truth.

 

[taijasi]

(cont'd)

There is no arrogance here; there is simply an assertion that the only error in understanding lies with, falls back upon, humanity. We may even have the blame, the burden, for the shortcoming in our grasp of the matter ... but I still say that the transgression, and the ignorance/nescience is not something irreconcilable with Divine Understanding [and hence with Divine Purpose and the Plan].

THIS, and primarily this, accounts for the Sacrifice of the Buddha, the Christ and the early effort of the Masters 150+ years ago to try and reach the outer awareness of the `Human Collective' ... this World Soul so splintered and lost, caught up and still much slumbering within the outer worlds and worldly pursuits.

Are we coming round, in many ways, and beginning to sense Their Call, the great urgency of the matter, and the desperate world need ... for getting back on track before we reach the brink? Are we ready to move past fights in the sandbox, maybe take a walk on the beach and contemplate the Beauty of Creation? I don't know, but I certainly hope so!!!

Some are; yet only a world awakening to the Laws of Karma and Rebirth, learning that what goes around, comes around [on every level, even if we must take this at its most SIMPLE interpretation first of all] ... only such a world will be able to make it to the stage of SUSTAINABLE SOCIETY which I believe the Great Ones seek to establish some short time into the future.

By taking the things categorised out of their real, lived and authentic context, everything becomes the same, all things in given categories become interchangeable, as if you could take one person out of a social situation, put another person in, and nothing would change.
This, common sense and experience tells us, is just not true.

Buddhism will teach you just the opposite. If you cannot walk a mile in the other person's shoes, don't even bother preaching. If you can, but seldom do, I'd still say keep pretty mum. If the practice gets difficult at times, at least we're able to identify that and work on it. If, heaven forbid, we ever fool ourselves into thinking we're `THERE' with our attainments and degree of equanimity ... I suggest we try Buddhism for awhile. Again. It just might be that's the Balance we're after.

For this is exactly what a Master can do, and it's what the Greatest of the Masters were able to do with all of their disciples ... and even with the multitudes. Is it any wonder that the Adversary rose up to stop this radical notion of upsetting the old ways? Until we take Christ's words about bread and stones, fish and serpents seriously, we will continue to fall short. In my swords-to-plowshares tally, I think there is still some work for Lord Vulcan to finish. Is anyone helping Him?

As the Daoists say, 'The Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tau' — so classification, even much-prixed esoteric knowledge, is nothing in itself, compared to what is. The 'true Tao' is experienced in the living moment, it cannot be captured or contained, but experienced.

Quite so. We must live it. An Amen Corner of 7 million [incarnate Souls] is pretty much what we're after. At least that would be a start!

I think the concept of 'self mastery' is flawed. Self-mastery necessarily involves control of self, and the control of the environment in which the self lives and moves, because the self is part of the landscape, as it were, we are not separate from it. Self-mastery is the will-to-power, and invariably the cause of all man's ills.

Here we have some differences in a prioris, or in what we take as granted. I do not consider the personality independent of its environment, including other human beings, either in an absolute sense ... OR even just because we could as easily be evolving upon some OTHER planet. But control of the ceaseless perturbations, the unending modifications of the thinking principle, is what Patanjali sought to assist us with in his Raja Yoga.

Because neither you nor I has mastered that system, we cannot directly attest to just what is the precise relationship between each other, between [lower] self and environment, or between little self [ego] and Soul, much less between little self and WORLD Soul. I think we need to get back to discussion of what is Soul, what is Self [if and where these differ, for Theosophy teaches THREE distinct Triune entities, with Soul as but the `Middle' Trinity] ... and maybe thereby try to consider varying views of what role environment plays.

Self-mastery is not primarily the "will-to-power." One should begin with GOODWILL, which leads to the Will-to-Love. We have a little knowledge, and that alone is almost enough to lead us to self-destruction. Knowledge plus power pretty much guarantees it. GOODWILL can transform our entire planet, however, and LOVE will lead us to where it is we're going.

So, as for our relationship to environment, I would say that we should be asking: are we considering our relationship to another single member of the Human Kingdom, an expression of the sub-human Kingdoms [involving group souls], a more advanced Being [or group of Beings, such as devas/angels], or the much larger question of the PLANETARY ENTITY, which Theosophists designate the Logos [Hindu Prajapati, Hebrew Elohim, etc.]. Earth's own Logos, after all, is that Being "in whom we live and move and have our being."

This, again, seems complicated and one may wonder why we need to have so much on the table to ask a question about self as relates to environment. I think it is fair to respond that the MEDIUM of relationship makes all the difference in the world. If we begin with the postulate that all is vibration, in motion and thus having relation to all else ... I think we shall see that "God is the Great Geometer" and we'd do damn well to never forget it!

Yes, I can go one further with you, and agree [in noticing a post from Brian a couple years ago on Rebirth, NDE's and such] that on a level of Consciousness far transcendent to our own, time and space are nought, so much of this really does become far simpler than would otherwise appear. Consciousness is synthetic, or what we would CALL integrated, yet how can that which is NON-Dual be spoken of accurately as Unified, or Synthetic, or WHOLE? The implication is a state OTHER than this.

Oh wait, that's what you were telling ME the "real world" is all about, weren't you. Such that we can't just pull, one person out of ...

... ohhhh, I see. But in my *language* I just translate this as, "God isn't so far away, after all!"

And while that doesn't sound very technical, are you sure you want to talk about the Anu, physical permanent atoms, mulaprakriti, bubbles in koilon, manvantaras and tanmatras, etc.? Can't we just stick to one or two basic concepts, and try and explore the full implications of a meeting of even one or two ideas that `GEL' ... ? I hope so.

Do we understand, then, the relationship of the Principle, CHRISTOS, to the man Jesus of Nazareth, or of same to any of the other Eastern or Western Adepts?

Well for one, I think you're making a massive and unfounded generalisation about what these 'Adepts' are supposed to agree on.
For my part, I'm pretty sure we don't agree.

That's okay, but it already marks a point of divergence. What don't *we* agree on?

If CHRISTOS is the Universal Principle of Consciousness which corresponds to the 2nd Aspect of THE LOGOS [yes, there IS only ONE] ... then why is it so hard to believe that this CHRISTOS has been present in our world prior to the lifetime of the man Jesus of Nazareth, as well as since?

You are facing some pretty stiff opposition if you pursue the argument against this point. I assure you, the strength of the Lord may be with you, but that sandstorm will get pretty fierce before it's all over.

Let me illustrate:

“The identical thing that we now call the Christian religion existed among the ancients and has not been lacking from the beginning of the human race until the coming of Christ in the flesh, from which moment on the true religion, which already existed, began to be called Christian.”​

I think Jesus incorporates far more than that. He is not an aspect of the Logos embodied, He is the embodiment of the Logos — the distinction is everything.

Here, we are collapsing several concepts, which exist within my understanding in what I might only call a more kaleidoscopic fashion, into a more synthetic - and NOT INACCURATE - view.

But I can provide my understanding of how the same experience in the life of Jesus occurred in the lives of Initiates before and after him, beginning with the most notable and familiar of Christian Initiates to also attain to a high Initiation, Saul of Tarsus converted into PAUL. Another is John the Beloved, another John the Baptist ...

... yet the list goes on.

Modern Theosophy explains this process, the Divine Alchemy whereby MAN becomes (a) GOD. And it does this not by inventing new rules for the game, or by invoking the `black box' [of impenetrable mystery] at an early stage along the Path. Rather, the focus is turned to beginnings as we ASPIRE to understand the earliest Cosmological processes, and the end GOAL is placed before the vision of the student in relation to whichever stage of involution/evolution he wishes to consider ~ at any given moment.

This is done not through dogma, but through familiarity with what is KNOWN [Gnosis] ~ by Initiates ~ and via what can be safely fostered and developed in those of us wherein the Wisdom [Eye, governed by the Heart] is beginning to Awaken.

What must be allowed to happen, and this the Masters ensure and tend to for all 60 billion souls, is the proper unfoldment of the INTUITIVE [or Buddhic] faculty within each human Jiva ... and of course, this only makes sense from that perspective wherein YOU AND I may be having the conversation, or still considering ourselves, and others, and all selves, as SEPARATE.

And this separation, seeming to apply even to man's relationship with God [fallen, redeemable, but uncertain and undetermined], is the greatest illusion of all. YES! That's the point. But what good, if/when we are still struggling with Hello/Goodbye? You see?

CSN&Y ~ Deja Vu
The Beatles ~ Within You, Without You
Traffic - Utterly Simple

Takes a bit of getting used to, but Brian, et al pretty much nailed it a couple years ago on a good thread here on Reincarnation. I think you'll see it's gotten some activity recently.

 

[taijasi]

I see the question of Soul/self, relationship to others and possibly the more hypothetical discussion of how the Soul/self relates to the Divine as being relevant and interesting here. Naturally, if you are considering a theistic, deistic or even monotheistic God, we will be somewhat at odds. After all, Thomas, just because I believe in a SUPREME LOGOS does not mean that I will pretend for ONE INSTANT that any of us ... [you finish that sentence]

... it sounds harsh to say "matter" or "matters" ~ and surely this is a misnomer, a mistake, a poor start if ever there were one, and if we wish to understand. But billions of galaxies, with billions of stars per galaxy, and EVERY star the outermost expression of the LOGOS hosting trillions of lesser lives [Jivas, and sub-lives, such as our cells] ... is quite enough to make my head swim.

I enjoy trying to remember that [I once knew, have always known, always will] there's just ONE, Supreme ~ LOGOS. This is the UNI-VERSE, the ONE-SONG of the Lord, from the Bhagavad Gita, and because "Mighty God is a Living Man," it is not inaccurate to picture, to IMAGINE God as person who is Infinitely reincarnating, NEVER a first life, NEVER a last.

This MAN, this great BEING, sleeps for what we may only call - an ETERNITY.

God then begins a cycle which lasts, not billions, but many, many trillions of years. I cannot fathom it!

We are somewhere in one of these iterations, yet God is the SOURCE of all Perfection, of all Creativity, of all Innovation. No two Cosmic inceptions are alike. Each improves upon the last. Could God be capable of any less?

The bringing into existence of Cosmos is a Sacrifice, to be certain (for how else could all of this arise except by the LIMITATION of THAT which is necessarily, by definition, INFINITE) ... yet it is no game of chance, no crapshoot, no pipe dream. Redemption is the natural complement and necessary soteriological component of the plan/project to put even ONE ATOM of substance into motion. And surely, if there is a God, this God has room in God's scheme for the Redemption of ALL. I believe ... in no less.

We are as sand on an infinite beach ... yet eventually, one day, all of this sand [as separate grains] will certainly cease. There will come a final cycle, a final phase, a final pause in the great IN-BREATH, or Big Crunch. And then I feel certain, we shall all be at PERFECT REST. Then, and then only, comes our final reward, and the Great Peace from which ~ afa we're concerned ~ there is no arising.

[Don't argue for your ego, man; for when asked to show us the Father, what did Christ say?]

God, following sufficient `REST' [and the Eastern term is Pralaya, for we must abandon anthropomorphizations, and accept that God does not need this `rest'] ... will one day awaken, and through the process of renewal and Self-Sacrifice, begin anew ~ THE CREATION.

I know of no more sublime subject for contemplation. I know, when I breathe, that even if I do not know, even though I may not begin to fathom, I am nonetheless encouraged to .... no less invited to sound out the depths. And wherever I find Peace, wherever it is that I am sure there is strength, THERE I know there is God.

For this, I may need no arhat, no adept, no advanced Initiate ... but Thomas, I will not seek to play with fire. In the words of one of the ancients:

"This world, which is the same for all, no one of gods or men has made. But it always was and will be: an ever-living fire, with measures of it kindling, and measures going out." ~Heraclitus
​

The psychological key to The Secret Doctrine is Alice Bailey's A Treatise on Cosmic Fire ... and while I anticipate several more lifetimes of study before I am ready for that stage of self-Mastery, when I make my application, I WILL be seeking the assistance of the Great Ones. In this, to follow the dictates of the Soul [the daemon of Socrates] is very wise, for it has been said that when the disciple is ready, the Soul will introduce him to the Master!

And the Masters try and help us to see, that in Truth, perhaps in Their world ... there really is `no difference.'

But hammer it out, and try to force all of this into the neat little boxes of lower mind ... and it's as you say: Too many categories; too many distinctions. At some point, the SYNTHETIC understanding must take over. At some point, the aspirant must see for himself that all of this is not really as abstract as [folks like me make] it sound(s).

No, we're caught up in it all alright. But we aren't not supposed to be. And we also aren't supposed to be here ... forever. That much seems clear, even ABUNDANTLY clear to some. Thus the Christians want to ease into Heaven, or attain to a well-deserved reward. And this, certainly, is a part of the process of BECOMING.

Does this cycle end with the penultimate moment of Cosmic manifestation [GOD's Incarnation]? For you see, to me, God IS NEVER out of Incarnation. You say, God manifested in Christ Jesus. I say, He is in every atom of substance, in every world, of every solar system, of every galaxy ~ in Cosmos. And I say to you that this TRIUNE Deity also manifests in degrees, and via a Septenate, and through 49 Fires ....

.... yet I'm way out of my depth. So I return, to a nice hot cup of tea. And bid you Good Day, pleasantly.

~taijasa

~I'll have to take a break before addressing the rest of the post from 2/21.~

 

[Thomas]

Hi Andrew —

Thomas, I told you a reply was forthcoming:

Thanks.

I say no different than philosophers, Gnostics, mystics, spiritualists, Vedantists, and Theosophists of all times.

In my experience and studies of the Sophia Perennis, they do, at different times, say different things. And furthermoree, different people construe different meanings from what they say!

I affirm that I have a body, but I am not that body.
I affirm that I have emotions, but I am not those emotions.
I affirm that I have a mind, but I am not that mind.

Reads like a riddle, doesn't it ... 'what am I?' or something ...

Later you say:

Yes, I can see this. The Soul in modern Theosophical thought, however, is a being unto itself.

That has been the Abrahamic view of the soul since time began. The quiddity or esse to use Scholastic language. As ever, context is everything. With regard to the topic of this thread, I am mindful of what is this body, these emotions, this mind, by which I can say 'I', and by which 'I' exist and 'I' act ... this being unto itself.

What this leaves, transcendent of form, is Consciousness...

Indeed. In my view, consciousness is a universal, as are all essences, but they are found nowhere but in the particular.

I follow Eriugena'a schemata of the four divisions of nature:
That which creates but is not created;
That which is created and creates;
That which is created and does not create;
That which is not created and does not create.

So I would put consciousness at the second level — of created essences.

+++

Thomas: But, my dear Taijasi — that's what Theosophy does, it categorizes everything!

Yes, Theosophy is not for those who seek easy answers.

I don't think it's a case of easy answers, it's a case of metaphysic and methodology.

In terms of metaphysics, I am mindful of the words of the Anonymous Author of Meditations on the Tarot, a formidable theosopher in the Russian tradition (a tradition still very much alive, by the way) who asks the question: Why does contemporary Theosophy make so much of the principle of fohat from Tibetan Buddhist texts, but make so little of the Holy Spirit as revealed in Christianity?

As for methodology, I'm more into symbols than signifiers ... one does not have to disect a rainbow to marvel at the rainbow, nor study every note to appreciate a symphony. The sciences reveal much, and I marvel at them, but they cannot match the experience of the rainbow, the feeling of a symphony, the awe of looking up into the heavens on a clear night. (Precious few of them at the moment, and a bit bloomin cold to be standing out in the garden ... too much ambient light too — we've got birds singing round the clock now, poor blighters.)

So my way is more towards embodied experience of the whole rather than the forensic investigation of the parts — the methodology of traditional Hermeticism rather than contemporary Theosophy — but I do appreciate it's a matter of taste and inclination ...

As for esoterism and gnosis — I found this in Plato:

Esoteric has two meanings.
First it simply means “inward”, “private”, “occult”, “hidden” or “mysterious”. On this basis, the Christian sacramental system is esoteric; or was originally so conceived.
Second, it means “of an elaborate and far-fetched character”. On this basis much of modern theoretical physics is thoroughly esoteric.

Plato's 'Theory of the Forms' can be categorised as esoteric in the second sense, and I think Theosophy generally follows the same lines. Similarly, any discussion of the Soul, the Immortality of the Human Spirit or the Transubstantiation of the Eucharist can be said to be esoteric. Of course, in the first sense none of these teachings are at all esoteric, as they are plainly set forth in published – that is exoteric – works!

True esoterism is concerned with underlying reality and spiritual truth, and less so with categories.

Plato's Seventh Letter states that he has never written anything about “the problems with which I am concerned” and adds that he “never will do so”.
"For this knowledge" (true gnosis, rather than the false gnosis against which St Paul warned Titus) "is not something that can be put into words like other sciences; but after long-continued intercourse between teacher and pupil, in joint pursuit of the subject, suddenly, like light flashing forth when a fire is kindled, it is born in the soul and straightway nourishes itself.
[“Epistle VII” (341c)]
Italics my emphasis. True gnosis is embodied understanding, not just intellectual insight. I think this is exemplified in the psychodynamism of the koan. In the hands of a master, it is a means enabling the disciple to break free. Today, i have seen them discussed, systematised and recorded in books, as if somehow you can teach yourself enlightenment, the koan way!

I think many of the apparent contradictions of Scripture work as koans — the idea that esoteric knowledge can resolved them, although true, nevertheless misses the mark ... to seeker knows more, and comes to know more and more, but never actually changes. Intellectual metanoia is a rarity. The breakthrough of real inspiration, real insight, the real eureka moment effects the body as much as the mind, sometimes moreso.

This is why, I believe, physical infirmity is so often evidenced in the lives of the great mystics ... and it shows up the often hollow practices of extreme asceticism, the flagellant, the stylite, the fakir and the guru ... as if mere physical adversity was the road and signifier of spiritual illumination.

First one must learn something about ... This alone can require several lifetimes of meditative practice (!) ... yet the real work cannot properly begin until the foundation is laid!

Well, thank God, we have another way 'through the veils' ...

It's not that I dismiss categorisation, I don't, my faith is Catholic, my metaphysic is Patristic, my methodology is Scholastic, but I'm moving from a cataphatic to an apophatic way, my path is Hermetic, my purpose Eckhartian, if such a think can be said — the way to the place where all distinction disappears.

Take the Tarot — a picture is worth a thousand words, they say, the picture necessarily must be explained but, too often and too easily, every word engenders a thousand other words. But I have seen a picture strike home, move someone deeper and more profoundly than all the words in the world.

Not so, not so. Think about the fractal, and ask yourself what it is that is repeating. If the PATTERN is what we're trying to understand, don't confuse the individual or the specific with the Universal.

Good point, and well made ... thank you.

This, the transcendence which you speak of, must become a Reality at some point, Thomas.

Yes. Theosis! Something visible in the countenance of the saints, and accessible in the contemplation of the eikon. Saints are organic eikons, as are well all ... but some radiate better than others, that's all.

+++

When one talks of 'consciousness' one is talking of the consciousness of self and the consciousness of the Other, which one can break down according to its own lexicon, in Christianity, we have thrones, dominions, principalities and powers, for example, or the angelic choirs, but really, everything is a matter of participation — nothing is fixed, everything is fluid — everything is organic — and as all participation is, for us, by the mediation of the Holy Spirit, then our hope rests in Him, our trust in the Son, and our faith in the Father ... then the pennies, as the saying goes, will look after themselves.

+++

I will only meet you halfway, as far as what I have experienced and consider to be possible ... inasmuch as there is usually a BOTH-AND which solves such communication issues or misunderstandings as you and I typically have.

And I will meet you there, brother Taijasi, and shake your hand!

I think God wants to see what we do with what we currently have.

This is why I focus on the corporeal and not the category ...

So you see, we do not even need to be enlightened.

No, I don't think we do, because I think 'enlightenment', indeed 'knowledge' ... is a trick of the mind. I think true enlightenment is lightness of heart.

Again and again, it seems to me, it's all about being, and not knowing ...

+++

By taking the things categorised out of their real, lived and authentic context, everything becomes the same, all things in given categories become interchangeable, as if you could take one person out of a social situation, put another person in, and nothing would change ... This, common sense and experience tells us, is just not true.

Buddhism will teach you just the opposite.

Buddhism would be wrong then!

If you cannot walk a mile in the other person's shoes, don't even bother preaching.

Ah, that's something else though, isn't it, that's empathy. There is still 'me' and 'thee' — it's 'me' walking in 'thy' shoes, not 'me' walking in a different pair of my shoes, nor a different me walking in the same shoes ...

then why is it so hard to believe that this CHRISTOS has been present in our world prior to the lifetime of the man Jesus of Nazareth, as well as since?

Christ is immanently present in and to creation from its inception, CHRISTOS is a principle that manifests through nature, I'm saying Jesus Christ is CHRISTOS manifest as Itself, as a person, not in a person ... not either/or, nor and/both ... just ... One.

The Incarnation was prefigured before creation, and the emanation of the event on Golgotha reverberates through time and space in all directions ... but whatever, whenever, wherever, the principle has to be realised somewhere.

And man has to be ready for the realisation ...

You are facing some pretty stiff opposition if you pursue the argument against this point. I assure you, the strength of the Lord may be with you, but that sandstorm will get pretty fierce before it's all over.

Yep, He told us that would happen, after all, but He also told us the reward for those who stood their ground in Him. Lordy, Taijasi, we battle each other often enough, and you can summon up a storm when you've a mind! I consider you a worthy adversary ... the only other route — which neither of us will countenance — is the threat of violence, and God preserve us both from that!

Are we the implacable force v the immovable object or what?

“The identical thing that we now call the Christian religion existed among the ancients and has not been lacking from the beginning of the human race until the coming of Christ in the flesh, from which moment on the true religion, which already existed, began to be called Christian.”

Well even the Christian Tradition talks of 'Christians before Christ' — Clement of Alexandria for example, but that same Clement also talks of the 'New Song' — but identical? No. Neither God nor nature are in the habit of repeating themselves. Every revelation is in its way unique — not only by virtue of what it is, but when it it, and where it is, and how it is ...

I no longer believe there is some storehouse of timeless knowledge or wisdom or teaching from the beginning ... knowledge and wisdom and teaching is organic, accrued through experience. Religion is the accrued wisdom of humanity, and whilst its principles might be eternal, its expression changes.

But I can provide my understanding of how the same experience in the life of Jesus occurred in the lives of Initiates before and after him, beginning with the most notable and familiar of Christian Initiates to also attain to a high Initiation, Saul of Tarsus converted into PAUL. Another is John the Beloved, another John the Baptist ...

And countless others ... but it was Jesus of Nazareth who rocked Saul's world — 'why dost thou presecutest me?' — not 'the Principle', not 'the Logos incarnate in the man', not 'my initiate' or 'my prophet' or 'my oracle' or 'my servant' ... but 'me'.

The experience of the initiate would not be strange to Saul of Tarsus, as the prophetic schools were an initiatic tradition in Judiasm, as is the Levitical Priesthood ... but he saw the difference between an initiate and the Incarnate.

Modern Theosophy explains this process, the Divine Alchemy whereby MAN becomes (a) GOD.

OK, but we explained it 2,000 years ago, and way simpler, and more direct, it seems to me ... and a way for everyman, not just an esoteric elite.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[taijasi]

Returning to some questions of your 2/21 post, Thomas:

See? Jesus didn't teach that at all — He taught 'without me you can do nothing' (John 15:5), deploying the metaphor of the vine — he taught that no man is an island, but rather the way to Union is through Co-(m)-union ... not individual power, but back the way we came. See my note about self mastery, above. It's an illusion, and a costly one ... it can cost you your soul, as Jesus also taught.

Jesus said 'follow me' when He called His disciples ... in fact, in all three Synpotic accounts, Jesus says to the rich young man: "If thou wilt be perfect ... and come follow me" — the journey is ongoing, and whenever and wherever we find ourselves, Jesus will be there saying 'follow me' ...

Jesus cannot be contained in any system men can dream up. The riches of the young man refers to everything we know ... in effect, to follow Jesus we 'leave ourselves behind' ...

But Thomas, it is not I who seek to put Jesus in this box ~ or system which you so rail on against.

YOURS, you see, is the Church, the MOTHER OF ALL SYSTEMS, or so she sets herself up to be ~ and presumes ~ in front of Humanity, to tell us what is and is not permitted when it comes to entertaining thoughts about the Savior.

Jesus most certainly taught us about Communion, about the strength of UNION, and the need for this in the outer world. But here is where we often break down ("The Spirit is willing ...") and hence it is useful to know something of the Real Self. Just as the man Jesus would teach in a later rebirth, two full incarnations later, there must be some persisting and subsisting relationship to or with the DI~Vine.Da Vine, you see, is a reminder that the LIFE Principle of God [known in every Tradition, present in every ATOM [from a~tomos, or INdivisible unit of CREATED substance] flows Deep underground. It unites us all, and if you are quite certain that no man is an island, then you will accept - on the face of necessity, consistency and common sense, that What goes around comes around.

In the East, this looks like: The Law of Evolution, via subsequent Rebirth, hence KARMA, or Cause and Effect

In the West, we see: As ye sew, SO shall ye reap, As ye mete it out, SO it shall be meted out, Judge not for as ye judge SO shall ye be judged

Only the man whose eyes are closed to Justice would argue that we speak of two unalike SYSTEMS. Jesus, you see, did not teach us to be slaves to an UN-Ordered, bllind and cold, or mechanistic system of structure. You are right in saying that he did not wish for us to lock him up in a golden cage, force him into religious robes [and thereby much of our understanding and `psychic access' to God] and DEIFY his every action, his every move, his every speech and indeed, his PHYSICAL PERSON.

Sadly, this is where RELIGION, and in this case the Christian, has failed her Great FOUNDER. The Divine Example which CHRIST sought to embody, on the other hand, and for which He so fortunately found The Man Jesus [Himself an Initiate] willing to lend the proverbial hand, is all that you enjoy preaching, Thomas ... and you have no argument there, from me.

Would that more people would contemplate this, and see where we have an illusion substituted for the Christ known by millions.

For me, wisdom is timeless, not because it is eternal, but because it is ephemeral. Wisdom is in the moment, it's doing just the right thing at just the right time, and that means living in the moment ... not doing what one did yesterday, not doing what one thinks one should do in moments like this, because there are no 'moments like this' every moment is unique, individual, a one-time event, and wisdom is the spontaneous product of we and it.

Wisdom, when it passes into memory, becomes knowledge, and is a guide and a utility, but we know very knowledgeable men who are not wise, and very wise men who are not knowledgeable.

The "memory" that you speak of here is the alaya-vijnana of Buddhism, certainly a well known concept long before modern Theosophy. It is taught to be " the focus or interior organ of consciousness into which is collected at the end of each incarnation the aroma of the higher experiences during that lifetime, thus forming a kind of treasury." As such it exists in the subtle mental realm, or higher heaven, even within the Buddhic/Sambhogakayic world. Thus, I most certainly believe in the ancient teaching of a storehouse for Soul virtue, wisdom and such qualities as merit a PRESENCE [sic] within the Kingdom of God.

In the Judeo-Christian esoteric Tradition, in the Mysteries and in Mysticism, in Kabbalism and in Gnosticism these aspects of the Soul ~ when considered as collected and even collective `Memory' ` are referred to as `The Temple of Solomon.' To believe that this is something so ephemeral as to have no uphadi, no BASIS or structure, order & organization whatsoever ... would be naive.

In simplicity, we may experience, marvel at and become lost in the bliss of the Divine. In sober thought we realize and understand that in our ignorance [or nescience], we do not know very much at all about how Cosmos is put together, ordered, governed and redeemed. If we presume to know very much, to have god in the box as it were ... it is usually not our peers whom we are fooling. It is certainly not God.

Socrates, if he was Wise at all, was so because he knew that he did not know. The paradox is perhaps what kind of doors this opens. I think you were speaking of doors recently, and boxes? Something about the Feminine in there ... and RELATIONSHIPS. If this is not what getting to know the Soul, and God [and Saviors and Liberators] is all about, then someone has been sleeping or daydreaming a bit too much.

Well, we're not nothing, are we?

I think you'll find, in the honesty ring, that even as an Ourobouros it is impossible to quite catch one's tail in the rather amusing way that we see our pet kittens trying.

What this means, as I intend it, is that our Promethean and `Individualizing' Aspect of Consciousness [itself dual and the proverbial `battleground'/Kurukshetra for our dilemma-come-Journey-to-Enlightenment] ... this SOUL thing, is best understand as a lesser, which is itself Becoming a Greater ... and only doing so, in the last analysis by letting go of one thing in order to GAIN another.

This, I believe, is pretty much what you were hinting at earlier, and which St. Paul speaks of when he says, "I die daily."

Another indication was The Baptizer who said to his followers, regarding the Christ: "He must increase, and I must decrease." An esoteric understanding of this parallels the obvious meaning, and refers to the domination of the lower self by the Solar Angel [the yielding of the personality to the Christ within].

You may certainly dismiss with all of these *levels* ... and in a wholistic, synthetic understanding this becomes useful.

Well, that depends. A 'holistic, synthetic understanding' of 'all in all' is where I'm headed ... not into the granulation of levels ...

Then you will know of and admit at once that Buddhic and Atmic consciousness are a fact, and you will attest to their reality ... either from your direct experience, or from your certain knowledge that these exist as all but required. For if you have posited, then accept that what you posit may actually exist. And if you have experienced, then accept that what you have experienced, so have others as well.

If you are willing to meet me on even ground, and even keel, then realize that from I have stood a time or two ~ in the crow's nest ~ I know that both non-duality and apparent multiplicity even unto infinite variety are not contradictory notions. These two may, and do co-exist. Nor even are these the only two major and necessary ways, at a certain point, to understand the worlds we inhabit.

You will find that we are ALL headed where you are headed. There are those ahead of us on the path, those at approximately the same stage, and those who follow ~ even close behind ~ in our footsteps. Where and how well we guide others is most certainly an important consideration, but I am reminded more & more it seems that I have an equally important responsibility to go where I am Guided.

And that, I know from past experience, means to follow the Teacher, the Master, wherever, in whatever `form' we may find him.

I'm looking beyond [various levels]. Plato also knew something about the real esoteric ...

Plato was initiated into the Mysteries. As such, he spoke of some things directly, some things through symbol and much as John writing the Book of Revelation, Plato knew he was presenting direct testimony of his participation in something so sublime that the only proper way to do so was to be honest and reveal that his understanding was incomplete ... that his Journey was NOT finished.

The Initiate who states otherwise must be doing so from a very advanced state, otherwise he is very much mistaken in his pronouncement ... and this is possible. Maybe he is indicating the symbolism of the Macrocosm in his own Microcosm. The Christ was able to do this, and also the Initiate Jesus simultaneously, yet without the error of pride or the misinterpretation of the experience undergone.

Each was entering into a new life, a new role, a deeper LEVEL of understanding of the Mysteries ~ and a greater LEVEL of empowerment. Each reached a new LEVEL in terms of how great, how inclusive was his Love, even as the Christ's Love is 2nd Ray and His Brother's is 6th Ray. Both attained to PERFECTION in the expression of these two types of Love, while also mastery ALL of the other Divine streams of energy [Rays 1-7] in their expression upon Earth's Systemic planes.

You cannot dispense with these levels if you also wish to understand and rightly assess your own progress in a spiritual JOURNEY ... for we all have engaged upon such a process of Becoming, even if we have not yet realized this in our outer brain awareness. The esotericist knows that in a certain phase of unfoldment, the Soul will be able to communicate with its outer reflection, the personality [perhaps we should state this the way we experience it, which is vice versa!] ... and begin the slow process of establishing a magnetic rapport, leading eventually to Soul control and the domination of the lower man.

Yes, our recalcitrance, our kicking against the pricks, our refusal to "die daily" can delay the process almost indefinitely ... but eventually, sooner or later there comes the crucial moments and final struggle between the dweller and the Angel of the Presence, and in the Long Dark Night of the Soul it must be that the man SUBMITs.

Now, if you think it is as easy as just closing one's eyes to what the Christ before you, the Buddha and his 900 arhats prior to the Christ, and many dozens of other Masters have known, observed and FOLLOWED - for each, I assure you, did not cheat but instead OBSERVED the Laws of God - then by all means, you keep that stiff uphill battle against the wind UP.

What I mean elsewhere about "stiff opposition" is simply that there are too many who have experienced some of the things which you ~ quite simply because you haven't ~ find it easy, more convenient or necessary to dismiss. As for the Mahatmas, the Rishis of the ancient epic poems, Mahabharata and Ramayana, plus countless other tales in every religious tradition, arguing against them is like telling us there is no Sun.

When it is further asserted that "one's own God-man is superior," the WISE man, the truly WISE man, sees immediately what folly has been evidenced. Thus, although he may be far from perfect himself, and though he may even understand that he has an uphill battle if he wishes and chooses to defend his knowledge ... he already KNOWS, plainly as can be, that he has won the argument. Where there is no case, there is no argument. All that can appear, before the eyes of the world, is the resistance, or friction, between the two individuals involved ... and their attempt to resolve some ancient KARMA.

For there is nothing else to be said when it comes to this question of levels. We are in agreement, yet even the oldest and wisest of philosophers, whom we are not ~ even if our current incarnations MIGHT parallel some of theirs in terms of our speculations [this is a rough, broad and likely inaccurate comparison, but hey, trust me, I know what I'm doing! ] ~ even the ancients admitted the difficulties and frustrations in discussing such matters as we are. And they said such things as "The Tao that can be named ..." ~ so again, I think we are more on the same page than we aren't, or don't seem to be.

 

[taijasi]

This is the true esoteric teaching — it's a lived experience, a breakthrough, it is a bodily experience.

Yes, the method of occultism is to bring through to the brain something of the higher wisdom, the proof of the Soul via direct experience ... the evidence that there is a Divine deep within himself, and that he is therefore a God in miniature. For the mystic the manner of Revelation may be different, but the goal is the same and so is the result. Both paths eventually merge, yet each must be lived, not simply imagined. "Talk does not cook the rice" ... "We must put our money where our mouth is."

You could, of course, argue methodologies until you turn blue in the face, but those who have followed the path and attained to Liberation or some relative degree of enlightenment are not diminished by the effort. Likewise I could choose to rail on against the path of mysticism and contemplative prayer, but this would be profitless because these also have their result and lead one to the goal.

There is a place for the esoteric, but soon it becomes an end in itself, and then you're into ever-increasing complexity, the schemata growing ever bigger, and each category breaks down into its subcategories, ad infinitum. It's dazzling, and beguiling, and a glamour ... meanwhile the real, the true and the beautiful recedes into the distance.

It is not an easy path, and we are not all invited to tread it ... certainly not immediately. It is not for everyone, it requires preparation, and it requires careful guidance if we are to tread it to its natural and intended completion. Hence the need for Masters. Deny these, and sure, you can affirm the power of the individual and suddenly ANYONE is able to reach enlightenment.

This, although it is what Christ Jesus called and invited us ALL to do in the long run, was certainly NOT what was meant when it was said, "MANY are called, FEW are chosen." This refers to the fact that in any given generation, only a handful might rise to the challenge and set foot upon the spiritual PATH proper ... or, having done so in the recent past, ATTAIN to Liberation/`Salvation.'

The danger does not exist for us if we observe the teaching in its EXOTERIC significance and application. This was embodied for us by Christ Jesus and the Buddha alike in the focus on PURITY in all our daily affairs, in thought, word and deed, plus an observation of Divine Law as best we understand it. Each Master taught these and demonstrated them, yet some cannot grasp them no matter which way they turn, let alone if they try to compare both systems.

The truth is, most would rather simply follow the slow but sure path, and if this is the prerogative of the individual concerned, then `free will' cannot be denied him, for the time being. In the greater cycle, all are destined and made to achieve, for anything is injustice for all involved. The first loophole we find, is probably the one which it is best for us to seek out, once again [in its opportunistic sense, rather than the reverse].

Well, I disagree.
For one, it assumes a natural progression from matter to spirit, which is not the case, and from spirit to God, which is not the case either.
For another, this supposes the animate evolves out of the inanimate.
For another, this renders things the sum of their parts, which I do not agree to be the case (as all nature demonstrates, the whole is greater than the sum).
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the Zohar, just the context it's deployed in here.

Like I said, if you kick against the pricks, it just doesn't help. It's like saying, "I don't disagree with gravity, but don't tell me that apple's gonna hit me on the head."

Matter and spirit and two poles of the same `THING.'
In this context, it refers to the 5th Kingdom or Deva/Angelic Hierarchy. Humanity is the 4th. There is no such thing as inanimate. The term itself is subjective, and if you understand the atom you know that even atoms have souls. That's our TOPIC, remember?

Things are not the sum of their parts. God incarnates via his Universe, but cannot be said to be simply composed of its various Kingdoms, even in their totality. It is, after all, called a UNI-VERSE, or ONE WORD. As in: LOGOS

Likewise, a man incarnates via his fourfold [or threefold] personality equipment, outwardly taking a physical *vehicle* ... yet he does not thereby become REDUCED TO these various principles, either of consciousness or of expression [appearance]. Here you mistake the FORM for the MAN, and the MAN occultism has ever said is CONSCIOUSNESS. The Eastern Wisdom stressed this, and it was a tenet of the Egyptian, Chaldean and Judeo-Christian Mystery traditions [including Gnosticism, Kabbalah, etc.] from time immemorial.

The Yggdrasil grows upside down in symbolism of a certain ORIENTATION, and to say that we have gotten our ego confused with our True Self is just the tip of the iceberg. If you're going to talk turkey, be willing to look at just who has grabbed what's neck. Or what has grabbed whose neck. I think you're saying something about not getting distracted by all the flying feathers ... yet if your Lord becomes present in the symbolic form of a Dove, find a place FAST where that Dove can land or alight without getting aimed at.

The Dove, as I know Him, may theoretically come to any one of 60 billion human Souls ... and more than twice that number of Devic. Yet I will not try and tell Him that His Presence is only Perfectly embodied in ONE.

He did not say that. And I know it to be false, even IF I may believe Christ Jesus to have been Christ's instrument and VAHAN for the Piscean Dispensation. Jiddu Krishnamurti might almost have become the same for Aquarius, and THEN what would our conversation look like.

A world in the throes of transition would not contain its ancient conflict; and the second half of the Great War divided us. The containment that occurred marked Humanity's choice [now realize that this occurred in the reverse order that I have stated it, looking from the Inner Planes outward] ... and owing to Divine Intervention we have lasted nearly 3/4 of a Century longer.

If Humanity is 18 million years into it, or possibly several billion ... do we really feel so bold that a few overgrown fireworks can be justified? "Oh, we were just testing Chinese gunpowder and got carried away?" "Yes we screwed up our own celestial orb but do you mind if we take yours and enslave you and blow up a few more while we're at it? "Hey, we need your home."

You see, sometimes, we DO have to learn how to play better, get along and work together ... before we're ready to move on to the next lesson in the Songbook. And that's what Hierarchy is about; and that's what Masters are for. And SOMEBODY has to be Custodian of this PLAN.

It's the Idea of Divine PURPOSE which I think takes the most getting used to. Indeed, even IF we can believe in 200 billion evolving Jivas during the current Solar System ... what's the POINT?

So that kind of gets us back on track. Or it does me, anyway.

No, I think the point is not to traverse the universe horizontally, but ascend vertically. In so doing, he encompasses all that is below him, and brings it with him. The is the 'secret' of the Sacrament of the Mass, hinted at by de Chardin but not quite grasped in its fulness. All that is lower is in the genetic structure of man (a very clever system), assumed to be evolutionary detritus, but perhaps far from the case.

As man becomes spiritualised, so do the flora, fauna, and mineral worlds, through him. That was always his job, to tend to a theophany and work in, with, by and through it, to bring it to the fruition that it will be.

Now we're talking the same language, and now you yourself have asserted the need for and fact of HIERARCHY. The Great ORDER of Being, whether discussed by Teilhard, the ancient Greeks or modern Theosophists, is always about a Divine PROGRESSION according to the PLAN of a Purposeful, Loving and Intelligent DEITY. You may find a focus on Threes, you may enter into a study of the Sevens. Yet if we can agree that there are, and try and stick to certain central themes ... there is really no obstacle that we cannot overcome and no matter which we cannot make clear.

We do this lattermost, as you have mentioned, through the Principle and direction of LIGHT, and we help to Reveal - foremost for ourselves for awhile, then increasingly for each other - that there is not ENDLESS variation in an unorganized & disordered CHAOS, but rather, an intelligible if complex STRUCTURE which underlies all of COSMOS. This includes Rhythm and Pattern and Harmony and Balance, yet it is transcendent of these for it is their very FOUNDATION. As you mention, it is the CAUSELESS CAUSE.

It may as well be called the Ein Soph ... yet it is FROM this ultimate ROOT or GROUND of being that all has emerged [the Ein Soph being the reverse of the Physical world if ever there were such, removed 180 degrees not by direction, or through space or in time ... but in materiality and hence in the DEGREE to which the Divine can be said to `directly' incarnate].

Yes, it is a lovely understanding that we are ALL ONE on a very deep level, or deep within, or in a transcendent state of everyday brain awareness ... and also contrary to the sensory evidence and normal yet faulty reasoning of our concrete mental faculties. But while I agree that it is part of our goal to LIVE this new understanding in our daily lives and outer awareness, it is also necessary to deal with what we, like all other people, DO seem to be experiencing.

And that includes strata, or layers and levels of personality consciousness and experience, and these may be spoken of as including the astral, mental and physical planes. The Ageless Wisdom teaches us NOT that we are seeking to lock our gaze into one of these lower worlds and suddenly *engage afterburners*, but as you say, we are essentially seeking to CLIMB Jacob's Ladder out of materiality ... and RETURN TO GODHEAD.

This, the Christ taught when He gave us the Parable of the Prodigal.

So we are in agreement, yet I am fairly certain that we actually emerged from God's Kingdom IN THE BEGINNING ... and that we therefore have an ALLEGORICAL account of the `ADAM KADMON' or `1st [Root Race] MAN' [even this being a recapitulation of and thus symbol for an earlier stage of evolution and densification of matter ... the falling of Spiritual non-conscious existence into generation in order to evolve a certain CONSCIOUS power to respond to our surroundings, which I believe you & I and most folks call: ME, `self' or `EGO/I' ~ yes, I'll keep mine for now, thank you, but for real, I do agree about the going horizontal part, as well as the rest of it].

Mankind may have preceded the animals in our evolution, all of the younger kingdoms coming later, but we are most certainly spiritually responsible - as their stewards, guides and co-nurturers - for a portion of their material and psychological advancement. Such is the nature of the Presence of the Divine in Nature and the gradual sublimation of the lesser by the Greater than the lower kingdoms benefit as the higher advance ... and the Christ force [or Principle] has its correspondence with the animals, vegetables and minerals, whereby HUMANITY Itself plays the central role.

The Perfection of Hierarchy can be understood at every ... hmm, what word is more appropriate for Thomas? IN every Kingdom. There.

You soul is your life, how can you 'become' your life, how can your life intermediate?

In the Ageless Wisdom teachings, the SOUL is the Christ Life, the Greater Life, the "Life more abundant." It is, by definition, the thing through which we must COME [or go] in order to reach the Father. As such it not a `thing' like most other things ... unless you are ready to talk about the only other two GREAT THINGS of such order or nature: namely, Aspects 1 & 3 of the Trinity.

So, yes, we must BECOME our `Soul' in the sense that we die to self, die to ego, as per St. Paul and John the Baptist ... as every great Mystic has sensed and seen ... and as some have witnessed, experienced, PROVEN and thereby Transcended. The 4th Degree Initiate incarnates Divinity. Jesus allegorically demonstrated our future Path of evolution, but he also literally incarnated the steps in his own life. Else, his demonstration would have been in actuality, in some significant way, a put-on. This was not the case.

The SOUL is the Intermediary, but it is teaching US to be. No one said it was easy. No one said it would take but a day. Then again, it is relative ... and if that don't describe time, what else does!

​

 

[taijasi]

Thus we do, literally, directly incarnate The Divine.

No, you've got that wrong, too.

Like I said, that's a stiff wind in your face there, Thomas. The sand will blow up somethin' fierce. It isn't because God's askin' you to dig in your heels and lean full-force against the gail, however.

The irony of the problem here is that when you don't resist, you may find that the winds subside and the sandstorm calms completely. In the stillness that follows, once your Vision has been restored ... I think you'll find that there is more of God in our Cosmos, even in our little world, than you [or I, or any of us] has as yet dreamed of realizing.

Therefore, while I [or thous, or most we know] can't be said to incarnate it [perfectly, or even close] ... you should probably just admit now that you're on the wrong side of the argument.

We DO incarnate the Divine, Thomas. I just don't have all day to way on you anymore to see that fact ... if you can't see it yet, for yourself. As a few folks have been known to have said, "It ain't my cross to bear."

Why don't you want to admit certain things? Could it be you are afraid of the repercussions, if you have to accept that we are, therefore, also Responsible for our actions - and their consequences - far more than always feels good, or convenient? See above (prior post, whatever) where I remind you what Christ and the Buddha taught on KARMA. Oh, beg pardon ... CAUSE and EFFECT!

Yes he did. "And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28.

Inasmuch as the body is the living shrine of the Truth that lives within us [SOUL] ... it is true that as we weaken the body [standing for the personality, the threefold equipment of our lower ego], we do weaken the grip of SOUL on body [or lower self]. This means lost time, and additional suffering in our afterlife experience.

Christ spoke truly. Our interpretation is faulty. That which is imperishable, neither suffers as men do, nor passes away as we understand the body to [as via decomposition following the abstraction of the vital principle]. But we are told by Sri Krishna [the Christ] in the Bhagavad Gita:

"The Soul can never be cut to pieces by any weapon, can never be burned by fire, can never be moistened by water & can never be dried by the wind.

This individual Soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. The Soul is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same."

~ Bhagavad Gita, Ch. 2, V. 23-24

​

All beings in Cosmos either are, have been or shall be Human.

I disagree. It also means the the end will never be realised, that you've entered a system of infinite regress, for every atom to experience every atom in time and space is not possible, for as much as you experience, others are also experiencing, so you can never attain to the full experience. You would go on forever, and not advance one single step.

Incorrect. I don't think you know the `end.' Yes, every atom has a glorious destiny ahead of it, Thomas. Here you would limit God and God's Cosmos ... but I don't think you have a leg to stand on. The piece of this equation you have not grasped is ETERNITY

And because you would make the mistake of LIMITING God's manifestation(s) ... you will continue to fall short of affirming, let alone espousing and celebrating this aspect of God's SLENDOR. The Beauty of a God Who has no first incarnation nor a final one ... is that indeed, in time it IS possible for every single atom to evolve through the whole Chain of Being all the way up Jacob's Ladder back to the Divine Bosom whence all have emerged.

When the human has not reached his goal in one cycle, he returns with all his Heavenly treasure to finish the Journey in the next. God does not cast away the WHEAT just because a few bits of lead did not quite make the gold standard. Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater; God doesn't.

God preserves ... THIS is the Christ Aspect, VISHNU, the Preserver.

So the 2nd Logos, the Soul, goes back out into subsequent reincarnation, even as GOD IN HIGHEST HEAVEN has done ... repeating the Divine example on a smaller, necessarily imperfect scale. We will "go out no more" and "become a pillar in the Temple" only when - on WHATEVER turn of the spiral - we have stored up the Treasure rightly, plus relinquished what we do not need, the CHAFF of the lower realms of existence, as you point out.

Except that these lower realms also serve as the FIELD OF SERVICE for the Soul on the final stages of the Path [including Discipleship through Initiation] ... thus we cannot and must not regard them as something merely to be transcended, much less avoided. For only through Serving our Fellow Man, and learning to call all men BROTHER can we come to understand that the Lord God lives within us ALL.

Christ taught this. If you missed it, you were sleeping, or daydreaming, or in resistance mode. I know each one of those; I have my own troubles. Plenty of ours are similar enough. Now we get to keep working on keeping on ~ and working ~ despite any and all obstacles! Everything, after all, is an OFLAG on some level ... an opportunity for learning and growth! AMEN

It's another system of infinite regress ... no matter how many times man is born, he will never be perfect, because his perfection lies not in himself, but in the fraternity of all life.

Not quite, except that the `fraternity of all life' part is spot on. Now you're getting to the HEART of it. When NO man is anOTHER man, you've seen the Troth. When EVERY man is your BROTHER, you've gotten the Gospel Message. When you KNOW, not theoretically but through experience, hence with a personal motivation, but also with the Wisdom that shows just what the NATURAL of the Divine Alchemy is all about, you see that if I hurt you, I also hurt ME.

I can close my eyes to my transgressions, but the Book of God's Remembrance does not do so. "Not one jot nor tittle ..." And this means accountability, and for that, balancing of Karmic Law is required. Project a capricious God-figure against the backdrop, the screen, the cave wall of your collective sub-conscious, or faith community, and guess what?

That God may tell you, even in a close whisper or a moment of deepest meditation that all sin's will be forgiven. Yet if do not interpret this in context, and keep the reminder of an insightful Thomas regarding TRANSCENDENCE on hand ... we are apt to MISapply these words of Wisdom. And soon, it is as simple as a few Hail Marys, or VICARIOUS atonement ... to attain to our soul's salvation.

Gee, sure sounds easy to me. Tell ya what. YOU stick with your path, I'll stick with mine. Even if I find the way hard going at times, I'm gonna keep smiling and remain confident that my way makes more sense. It does so FOR ME, and in this case, it's all that matters ~ immediately. In a bigger picture, I try to make a little bit of sense in the conversation, and try to keep engaging you in such a way that you will see: I really don't care what you think about what I think. Instead, I know that the world is watching. And even while I don't mind messing up, and have learned to laugh at myself, I also know what my principles are. Some of them ...

... *what*was the thread topic again?

Oh yeah. SOUL. 2nd Principle of man's 3fold Being [Spirit, Soul, personality or LIFE, Quality, appearance] ... and the CRUX of our evolution at this point, where matter meets Consciousness and where the battleground exists which determines our entrance to the Path of the Spirit.

SPIRIT, as the 1st Principle [the INdivisible Causeless Cause and 1st Logos] is ETERNAL.

matter, evanescent, fleeting, illusory and deceptive, while governed by 3rd Logos, evidencing the 3rd Principle ... is unreliable. Makes God's Cosmos sound and seem a bit imperfect. Guess what?

It is. God, too, is Becoming. That's supposed to be a big secret or something, but it really isn't. We just don't know what to do with it sometimes, because it makes us a little uneasy. But God told Moses, and Moses communicated that to his people. And they were a little too gay and frolicky, and I hear it didn't go over so well.

So how is it, my friend Thomas [co-disciple on the path] that you tell me we just can't be undergoing peregrinations, and meeting each other again, and again, and again? I was here in the 60s [and I'm 39 next week], and I'll still be here when ... about 2510, Lord Christ comes again.

Just getting a little poetic, because I'm feeling noetic ... and some things, whichever direction you look, I REMEMBER.

Life is universal, soul refers to an instance, a living being.

Divisions, divisions, categories and levels! How come you can see it so well going, but completely miss it COMING sometimes? Or of course, precisely vice versa? I'm the same way.

Indeed, LIFE and SOUL are not identical, but neither is Soul a strict, distinct individual ... as we mistake ourselves to be. This is precisely the PROBLEM with our `self-understanding.' This, in short, is egoity, and it is the *false* self, since a more accurate self-understanding is that we are ROOTED in [or permeated by] that Universal LIFE. In that, we cannot be broken off from God, and then said to have to reunite with Him.

Or then, was that not the entire point of existence here, plus assisting others with the same Journey? Hmmm ... Which is it now?

I would say the angelic ascent and descent is the order of experience, of give and take ... I think the ladder is the body.

Sure. There are many layers [3, 7, ?] of interpretation.

More later ...

cheers,
AndrewX

​

 

[taijasi]

Thomas,

To answer a few more points, from your reply of 3/11:

I say no different than philosophers, Gnostics, mystics, spiritualists, Vedantists, and Theosophists of all times.

In my experience and studies of the Sophia Perennis, they do, at different times, say different things. And furthermoree, different people construe different meanings from what they say!

Well, it's a bit bold of me to be so rigid, yet what I mean is that there is an underlying, Universal Truth ... a WISDOM of GOD [Theos Sophia], no matter what we choose to call it, or whether we label it at all. "The Tao that can be named" may not be the Eternal Tao, but this doesn't mean we can't find points in common and discuss them. Faiths haven't arisen by accident throughout the ages, with commonalities of teaching and like-minded followers therein, grouped around some Divine example Who embodied certain Truths and who Inspired the people of his or her own time, even for millennia to come.

If there is a Sophia Perennis it must surely have ONE trunk, just as the Bodhi Tree [hmmm] under which the Great One sat. Its roots may reach deep, deep down into the soil of our one planet, just as its branches extend far into the sky above and spread out into a wide diversity of leaf-endings. Every one of the 7 billion or so leaves on this tree nevertheless owes its existence to a common branch and a common trunk.

As to the 2nd point you make, I quite agree and as a matter of fact I think this is where we need to focus. Finding points in common is sometimes difficult, sometimes easy, but where we differ in our interpretation is often the most fertile ground for discussion. And this, not because it provides the most room for argument or bickering, even if this is what some discussions quickly devolve to; rather, because it is sometimes in explaining our divergences that we realize our varying faith traditions and belief systems still need to exist. This diversity exists, not by accident ...

Theosophists would never argue that it is best to dispense with exoteric religion, or eliminate positions which do not fit our individual interpretations and preferences. For esotericists often know quite well that the world's great Religions have evolved according to the Seven Ray lines, on PURPOSE and in keeping with ~ because inspired by ~ God's Divine Plan. We celebrate the Agents of this Plan, and we Respect Their various successes in every part of the world, in every time.

Those who insist that "their religion is right," meaning often enough that in their blind zeal and fanaticism they would just as soon cleanse the world of the stain of all other belief systems, are usually the greatest xenophobes ... and have invariably missed the message and the mark of the Inspiring and Inspired Founder of their own tradition (let alone Those Founders behind all others). And is this not the situation we are faced with today, regardless as to which brand of rabid fundamentalism the person or group in question has latched onto?

In my view, consciousness is a universal, as are all essences, but they are found nowhere but in the particular.

This is fine, so long as we stipulate that we are speaking of the Cosmos in Incarnation.

You love to make this point elsewhere, yet Theosophists insist that it is the LOGOS Himself [Itself] Whom and which is Incarnating. We do not believe that God created Cosmos ex nihilo, gave BIRTH [literally] to an inanimate and DEAD mater [for indeed, the LIVING MOTHER and Feminine Principle in the MacroCOSM is the VIRGIN, and Her Creation, thanks to the Seed provided by the FATHER is the 2nd Logos, the CHRIST Aspect in the MacroCOSM ... in short, the entire Created Cosmos, yes, literally!].

The Mater lives, and in her every atom, the A-Tomos or indivisible unit, there is embodied and symbolized in miniature what exists even on the grandest and most Supreme scale. Hermes tells us: As above, so below. And while Consciousness has come into being in this particular Cosmos, giving expression to the Essential Whom and which underlies all ... these two are only able to do so, able to manifest via the Vahan or Vehicle which the Mother by her very nature provides.

She can be seen as the perpetual womb, through which and by Whom ALL that takes birth in Cosmos - including Cosmos Itself - is able to do so, yet she also provides much of the nourishment, on every level and in various ways by which the Christ child [or its expression and equivalent in any Kingdom, on any level, at any location in Cosmos] gets its start in the early stages of post-natal development.

This being the case, it is not the Mother alone by Whom and which the Christ child grows, matures and comes into His own. To say more on this should not be required; can we not look out into the world and witness this so Universally that ... only a fool would deny it? It is only when we turn to the religious and spiritual teaching, and ask questions about the SOUL in MAN, or the SOUL Nature, let alone the World Soul or the very SOUL of God ... that difficulty arises.

I think it is simple enough to keep to the Universal Doctrine within the Theos Sophia which tells us that all which occurs in Nature, including the comings and goings of MAN, who is a part of nature [being a Kingdom within, rather than some strange exception to, the rules of Nature], are governed by the Law of Cause and Effect. We see this is the CYCLES from which no man, no being, not the finest speck of matter or even the grandest Galaxy or supercluster of Galaxies, is exempt or excepted.

Transcendence of a particular Cycle, via `graduation' or Liberation, called in some traditions Salvation or Redemption ... is what we are after. The Redemption of matter itself, the very SUBSTANCE in the 7fold Planetary and Solar System into which Man and Logos alike are incarnate [the Logos on a much higher turn of the spiral than Man] ... is indeed one statement of our Purpose here in incarnation.

If a lengthy quotation from Discipleship in the New Age, vol. 2 may here be permitted, I think it may help to clarify this matter:

This theme of redemption (which underlies all the initiatory processes) is hidden in the karmic responsibilities of Sanat Kumara; stage by stage, initiation by initiation, the disciple arrives at an understanding of redemption. First of all, he learns to bring about the redemption of his threefold personality; then the concept enlarges along paralleling lines as he seeks the redemption of his fellowmen; later, he shares the redemptive work connected with all true hierarchical endeavour and becomes an "active part of a redeeming Ashram." At the later initiations, and after the fifth Initiation of Revelation, he sees with a new clarity some of the karmic liabilities which have led the planetary Logos to create this planet of suffering, sorrow, pain and struggle; he realises then (and with joy) that this little planet is essentially unique in its purpose and its techniques, and that on it and within it (if you could but penetrate below the surface) a great redemptive experiment is going forward; its prime implementing factors and its scientific agents are the "sons of mind who choose to be the sons of men and yet for all eternity remain the Sons of God." These "sons of mind" were chosen, in that far distant time when the fourth kingdom in nature came into being, to carry forward the science of redemption. There is a true historical and spiritually esoteric significance in the words in The New Testament that the "whole creation groaneth and travaileth together in pain until now, waiting for the manifestation of the Sons of God." St. Paul is there referring to planetary purpose and to the determined insistence of the Sons of God that eventually—as they brought about the redemption of substance, of matter and form, and thus proved the possibility of that redemption through their own transfigured personalities—their reward should be their eventual manifestation as expressions of divinity. For this purpose and with this goal in view, they instituted the great evolutionary process of initiation, thus producing a continuity of revelation and of enlightenment. In reality, the period of time at which the final initiation is undergone is simply a climaxing, triumphant demonstration of the realisation and purpose of all past experiences; it is fulfilment (by the One Initiator) of the first promise ever made to the "sons of mind" when they originally started their redemptive work, and is "a sudden blazing forth of the individual glory and its merging at initiation with the glory of the whole." [`Redemption' is in blue, as it was my search term.]
​

So you see, yes, the cycles may be UN-ending, yet we are always entering onto a `Higher turn' of the spiral, whereby we may visualize this Spiral, if we are viewing it from below, as widening or OPENing as we Ascend.

Now what we know, or believe, or at least, so does pretty well every esotericist I have ever met ... is that if you take this model of a Spiral and bend [visually] the model itself, you will find that it doubles over so as to form an additional coil, or Greater Spiral. This illustrates that indeed, there IS such a thing as a FIRST incarnation - for every human - into the Human Kingdom, whereby the Individualized Soul took a first birth.

Likewise, there is a LAST Incarnation, as discussed on another thread recently here at IO ... and that is currently the equivalent of the 6th Initiation. Regardless as to how many lives we undertake in the Human Kingdom, however, this is but the 4th Kingdom as we ascend that spiral ... for once we are Liberated from this particular form [or I should say TYPE] of incarnation, we will undergo an additional, in a different Kingdom. Thus, prior to being Human our SOUL Principle [if not quite the Individualized Soul which is being discussed on this thread] had an equivalent in each of the `lower' Kingdoms, just as in the 5th Kingdom and beyond there is still an equivalent [or ensouling Principle] to consider.

One point that here needs clearing up: We do not have to hasten our development and seek to quickly thread the Initiatory Path; the choice is optional. It is made plain by the Tibetan Master, author of the material above quoted, that Initiation is a unique experiment undergone by the Earth Logos at this time, owing to `His' current stage on Path of spiritual evolution.

Should we choose to follow the natural course of development, which is far slower and much, much less demanding of us, we shall nevertheless attain to the same results as those who currently seek to hasten their progress, sacrifice much and discipline themselves in order to reach the Goal ahead of schedule. The only Noble motivation for this choice, of course, is the contribution we can make to our fellow man as we travel the spiritual path ... for one need not wait until Enlightenment or the penultimate moment in order to offer his services. Rather, this is the first sign to our Teachers that we may be ready to be given certain opportunities ... this willingness to look beyond or outside of our own satisfaction & development.

In this model, of course, I think you will see just how the esotericist regards the clamor and the hoopla, the fretting, the fears and the tears, when it comes to this matter of "my personal salvation." We know, quite well, that such is never actually in jeopardy, but rather, what is understood is that here we have the proverbial case of the man who seeks to gain for himself ... and we know, on the personality level, what this spells. On the other hand, when all is offered up in Service, especially with NO thought of (the separated) self ... again, it is clear what will be the Reward.

Oh, that more understood the implications of certain teachings ... But, this realization is slow to come, often slowest for those who cling most and fear most. What a tragedy.

So I would put consciousness at the second level — of created essences.

Yep, sounds right to me. Certainly, even on the spiritual level, we are not Self-Create(d), or the Causeless Cause. We have a correspondence to what in Hinduism are the `Mind-born Sons of Brahma.' Gee, those Greeks sure did sound a lot like the authors of the Vedas, sometimes.

a formidable theosopher in the Russian tradition ... asks the question: Why does contemporary Theosophy make so much of the principle of fohat from Tibetan Buddhist texts, but make so little of the Holy Spirit as revealed in Christianity?

Apparently he must not be too formidable, unless we are speaking of Sumo wrestling. Thomas, Fohat IS the Holy Spirit. In the world of online video gaming, we call this - FAIL!

Sorry to be a smart-ass, but umm, that guy needs to go back and hit the books. I don't recommend Cosmic Fire, however. Sounds like he's not quite ready ...

~~

 

[taijasi]

Thomas,

I don't quite think you've rightly assessed contemporary Theosophy if all that you see is "the forensic investigation of the parts." For here, you show that really don't know much about what Theosophers do. They are often involved in Service project in their communities, and I am quite sure that plenty of their co-volunteers are unaware of them being Theosophists at all. In other cases, where there are study and meditation groups, I think it is *precisely* the experiential aspect which the members and attendees are after ... though again, not so much just so they can say, "Guess what happened to me," but rather, so that they may aid in the ONE WORK.

Again, on individual levels, even while there are various aims to one's meditative practice and goals for study, I think more of these types of folks are engaged in the work of self-transformation, self-discipline and self-sacrifice in the name of a Higher Good than you apparently realize. They are not interested in learning 1001 names for God, or having some amazing vision into ancient Atlantis ~ at least not the majority of them ~ but rather, they would rather experience that Rainbow, just as you have mentioned. They would rather HEAR and see and experience the symphony than simply sit and tell you all about who plays in it, what instrument they have or which conservatory they went to and in what year.

Now, of course there are exceptions, and I fit more closely than I would prefer. But less time sitting here railing on about things I know full well to work for me, yet which I also know are apparently not quite right for you [in your religious or spiritual practice, and in helping you to understand your world and be a more productive and positive part in it] ... is probably in order. After all, I do enjoy rainbows. And if all you can see is blue, or green, or yellow ~ I feel like you're missing out. Especially if what you're most determined to do is tell me how great these colors are. And again, that's NOT because I disagree that such colors exist, or that I say any one of them is BETTER than another.

I say, all are there. And the Seven, which express the MAXIMUM mathematical number of variations upon the THREE, just as the THREE ~ which MUST exist as soon as you have TWO [no duality is possible w/o also and immediately introducing the interplay between these two, THUS showing the nature of the Principle of Consciousness ~ oh yeah, that's SOUL, and that's what we're discussing] ~ ultimately resolve into ONE.

But gee, rainbows are also perty. And that takes no great intellect to realize, or rumination to try and unravel. Like you said, it's just that we OBSERVE the Rainbow ... on some level.

But the esotericst may realize the correlation between the Rainbow and the Seven, the Three and the ONE, while also the fact that the AntasKarana of Vedic and esoteric teachings is sometimes translated as the RAINBOW BRIDGE ... and s/he will also perhaps realize how symbolic that POT of `GOLD' is which the little Green Man seems to be chasing, VIA that Rainbow Path.

And when people tell him adepts don't exist, he may simply smile ... and laugh.

[QUOTE-Thomas]True esoterism is concerned with underlying reality and spiritual truth[/QUOTE]Yes, try studying some Theosophy; perhaps you just haven't found an author who you can appreciate yet. I think it's a matter of what resonates. OR, maybe you'd like to look at the Gnostic teachings which in which Jesus instructed the Apostles. HPB actually tells us a great deal about this system, explaining clearly the Three Trinities and showing the Christian much about his own religion which he usually cannot be bothered or interested to learn.

Still, different SYSTEMS appeal to different people, and I find that the moment they put down one system (that's a double entendre if ever there were one), perhaps because it is "too full of categories and dissections," they find themselves immediately drawn to another which is no less replete with such non-wholistic methods of study and tabulations of information. Or of course, they fail to see, in their own piecemeal interpretation of what the Founder of their cherished Faith Tradition had to say, that NOWHERE else has there been more codification, breaking down, shoving into little boxes, little boxes and the an attempt made to force the whole world to believe this same SYSTEM.

Well, thank God, we have another way 'through the veils' ...

Veils exist for a reason. Believe it or not, they aren't there simply to be torn, shredded, removed or discarded. All things serve a Purpose, even if only on a mundane level. That purpose may be fleeting, and may quickly render an object, or a state of mind obsolete. But let's not try and be such opportunists that all we want to do is GET to where we're going. With such a mindset, we forget about the PURPOSE of the Journey itself. And, I find we lose track of where our own feet are ... and then it's possible to forget and deny the Journey, just as we can deny the Christ within, whether that within pertains to ourself, our neighbor, our enemy or our world at large.

Strange, how once we start removing veils, the Sacred can all of a sudden seem so identical with the mundane.

The Holy of Holies was so regarded for a reason. Nor was it Holy because men prayed it up/into that condition.

I'd be careful which veils I go tearing away at. Take it from someone who knows; these, on every level, exist for a Purpose. I can accept that your symbolism and suggestion has a specific connotation. But you are not exempt from THE WAY things work, simply because you may be ignorant of the design of things ~ on a deeper, or ESOTERIC level.

God does not keep his Master set of Cosmic Plans in the bedroom of one Thomas or an Andrew. And it is not required to check this chart before undertaking some important series of changes. After a certain point, we will realize, to whatever degree and in whatever way, maybe in the same moment as we stare at the computer screen, maybe later as we are watching the tellie:

Things just are.

Oh well, so much for tennis!

Meanwhile, you should watch `The Adjustment Bureau.' I had no idea is was based on a Philip Dick novel. It is pure Inspiration.

nothing is fixed, everything is fluid

Fluid, organic Reality, trusting to our Higher Power [and Higher Powers still, than whatever tiny entity we call `Higher'] ... yes, I buy this, I trust in this, I affirm this, I believe this.

The Incarnation was prefigured before creation

Apparently not if you're not Catholic. See above in my discussion on the Incarnation of the Divine via Cosmos Itself. I am a hylozoist, not a believer that somehow, 18 billion years - let alone several trillion - with billions and trillions of stars and planets and other civilizations and beings, all evolving toward Perfection ... somehow all need, hinge around, and CENTER on ...

EARTH
Jesus
or the specific, historical events of ancient Palestine.

Now, if you wish to take the line of argument that IN and THROUGH Jesus we have something of the Christos revealed, or to focus on the CHRISTOS and speak of how Jesus revealed to us the UNIVERSAL ... I am *possibly* interested.

But of course, not to hear any more Church dogma trotted around. Sorry, those dog&ponies just don't interest me. I believe that I am the arbiter of my OWN Destiny. And I believe the same for all beings [certainly all of Humanity].

This, then, is the nature of Soul ... that WE DETERMINE our own future condition [including Salvation], THOROUGHLY in accord with the Laws of Evolution and of Karma ... and NOT via some kind of events external to our true being.

No one is sitting there, respecting our `free will,' yet simultaneously well aware that in fact, it is HIS STAMPED IDEAS which we must one day swallow. That's not God; that's fear.

I no longer believe there is some storehouse of timeless knowledge or wisdom or teaching from the beginning ...

I do not fear God, or the future, come what may precisely because such a storehouse does exist, because such timeless knowledge and Wisdom is there to guidance. And I know it in many of its forms.

God willing, yet sometimes more importantly, vitally and necessarily US willing ... every member of Humanity shall come to know this soon, in time enough, to preserve what's here, that we may get on with things.

 

[taijasi]

Jesus of Nazareth ... rocked Saul's world

Yes, because Saul realized that LIKE JESUS he was capable of the Incarnation and expression of THE CHRISTOS. Again, this is the AGELESS Wisdom, not something that Jesus dreamed up, Christ dreamed up, or even that GOD dreamed up. In ontological or metaphysical terms, the relation of the esoteric to the exoteric can be discussed, but at the same time we can say about both: they simply ARE.

Saul knew what he knew, and was capable of the Conversion [describing a certain stage on the Path of Initiation, or even the process as a whole] because he WITNESSed it in Jesus and realized, this can happen in ME also. The epiphany that some seek will never come, until this same realization occurs. It is not a ONE TIME EVENT. And in this, you must realize that St. Paul's "I die daily" was not meant as a verification that "yes, it's your ego which will survive and prosper and live forever in a thoroughly Christian and exclusive `Heaven'." Pity. So much resistance ... but isn't that simply because we kick against the pricks?

As for an "esoteric elite," let's get clear on something. The `elite' is certainly that, yet they ARE elite because they LISTENED. And after HEARING, they PRACTICED. I believe you have emphasized that in our dialogue, just as I am acknowledging that things don't just happen ... leading to overnight, instant enlightenment, or vicarious atonement.

There is no tradition of any Great One that teaches that Enlightenment or Liberation occurs overnight. Each will emphasize that it is through disciplined effort, personal self-sacrifice and ultimately a Brotherly Love demonstrated without distinction between self & other ... that we will ALL, eventually and in good company, REACH the Goal.

It is a jealous, corrupt, power-hunger clergy, THIS being the group that actually has its talons set on status and elitism ... which seeks to EXPLOIT the innocent, fearful masses often enough ... and thereby sets itself up as a FALSE AUTHORITY on the Earth, since too many of Humanity are as yet newly entrant upon that path of Individuality which leads, albeit through much hardship, pain, toil and apparent suffering, to LIBERATION.

There is a Divine PLAN, and this, kept and WORKED OUT by the World Teacher [Christ] via an ABLE Hierarchy of Intelligent, Loving World Workers, entails the Salvation of EVERY man, every Soul. There are NO special exceptions or special privileges ... and I can think of nothing more sinister and harmful as to attempt to so bend, so distort, so manipulate the Doctrines of the Great Ones as to present a serious of capricious, whimsical interferences BY the Divine into what MUST of necessity be a rhythmic, balanced, Perfected ORDER.

If we wish to understand the Mysteries, then we must start by seeking to understand the natural world. We must study ourselves, our planet, our society and our UNDERSTANDING, by placing upon the examining table even consciousness itself. For in doing this, what we shall find, is that we are mistaken about a great many of our most cherished and pet assumptions regarding all of the above.

This has EVER been the discovery, throughout history, of men and women who have been so BOLD, so Courageous, as to take on, often at POINT OF SPEAR or otherwise at threat and risk of death [or worse] ... those challenging `authorities' or ideologies and belief systems, which opposed free inquiry and/or had set up false explanations to account for things.

Notice Hypatia, who dared to question and dared to teach, and notice what was her reward. Yes, the threats that are made are sometimes great, but we must continually renew our faith, as also our strength and vigor, in the process of INQUIRY, of Self-Discovery ... and, where we believe in it, in the processes of Divinely-Guided SPIRITUAL [as well as material] Evolution which have always seen to the well-being of Humanity and of the Planet.

Just because we ourselves may not have witnessed something, does not mean that we KNOW it does not exist. Indeed, when those around us testify to it, isn't it interesting to note the reaction. Where the witnessing party is only 1 or 2, and especially where he or she seeks to go against prevailing views, we KNOW WELL what kind of resistance there can be. And we know that confessions can be beaten out of these witches, and the TRUTH made to be uttered ... naturally, for their own well-being and for the good of [the] society. After all, we can't have such disorder, such questioning of AUTHORITY.

But notice, that even when a country or a society is run by an evil tyrant and a dictator, it is still possible that when hundreds, even THOUSANDS of demonstrators join forces to question, and if necessary overthrow the corrupt regime ... in the `three worlds' where injustice is still possible in the short term [for Karma, being Divine LAW, WILL prevail, as also the Law of LOVE] ... it is still possible for evil tyrants to oppress and SUPPRESS those who are demonstrating on the side of RIGHTEOUSNESS.

What fools, who would think that their `Authority,' and the power of MIGHT, vindicates them and justifies their actions. The blood is on their hands, and they must answer for their crimes.

Truth, also, will demand before we are allowed to pass, that we account for our persecutions ... and when we are shown what FOLLY it is that led us our decisions, and motivated our actions ... I think we may, some of us, wish harder than ever that Justice were not blind. For she does not care WHO you worshipped, or HOW OFTEN, or WHAT YOU SAID ... much less WHO TOLD YOU TO, or WHY. These, though they factor, are all done so [factored] IN relative measure.

The measure, as I believe some of us well know, is what is your heart, compared, on the scale of Ma'at ... to the FEATHER?

Are you of heavy heart?

I have been told, on plenty of occasions, to lighten up. So I KNOW some of my shortcomings. And I know that I have much, MUCH to learn from my Soul. Can I quantify all of that, and imagine it as fitting into some book? Even the `Book of God?'

Ah, not really. For I agree, that we must ACT.

Gee, I think there ACTually is a book like that already, however, which was supposed to be of inspiration to us. I guess it just hasn't sunk in yet.

The ACTS of the Apostles, Inspired and made possible precisely because there was a MASTER Who moved among them, and Who taught, encouraged, supported, protected and even - to a degree - accounted for them ... these ACTS are certainly worth considering as we look out upon the world stage today, and ask ourselves:

WHY are things the way they are?

Now consider, that from the point of view of one who KNOWS that Adepts still inspire the world, and who KNOWS Them to Love Humanity as much as any Father has ever loved his children ...

... from this point of view, we really, truly are still only about halfway through the `Earth experiment,' and while some people behave pretty much as if this thing is all but over, The Human SOUL as well as Hierarchy realizes [on its own plane], there's really quite a ways to GO.

Certain concepts simply cannot be dispensed with, if we would understand the nature of spiritual progress, and if we would ourselves set foot upon the Path ... and be of assistance in the bigger picture.

Those who I know to have done this, do not all call themselves Theosphists, or Muslims, or Buddhists or Christians, or spiritual or religious .. for some are thoroughly scientific, artistic, humanistic or even atheistic in their worldview. Yet I see and I know that the ONE Soul is active in their lives, and however we may wish to account for that, it is really only OWING to that, that some of the rest of us stand a chance.

I say stand a chance, because no one promised you that it wouldn't be difficult at times, and no one said it wasn't possible to really screw things up. It's happened before, and that ** can happen again.

God help us if it does, but let us Hope and Pray that it doesn't. And meanwhile, I hope we're all doing something [or plenty of somethings] to be part of the Solution, the Divine Solution, rather than the same old same old, typical and oh-so-familiar problem(s).

AMEN

 

[Thomas]

The Dove, as I know Him, may theoretically come to any one of 60 billion human Souls ... and more than twice that number of Devic. Yet I will not try and tell Him that His Presence is only Perfectly embodied in ONE.

Nor will I ... and that's the point, old friend ...

It's this kind of comment that indicates to me that the Dove, as you know Him, is evidently not the Dove I am talking about, and you follow this with a defective understanding of Christian doctrine, arguing against something we don't in fact believe ... we have never even implied that the Dove is embodied in One, as you suggest.

So the author of Meditations on the Tarot was right.

The Dove, the sign of the Holy Spirit, is Itself never embodied — the Dove occupies the spaces between, the Dove is all about relations, it is acategorical and meta-personal, which is why it escapes your schemata.

The Dove, the Holy Spirit, is immanently present to all, and it is because of this real immanence that neither the Dove, nor those who know Him, can be categorised. Thus what is possible in Christianity you would rule as impossible, because it does not fit your schemata. I'm sorry, I cannot help that, but nor will I abandon what is evident in Scripture, to follow a man-made doctrine.

The story of the robber crucified with Jesus blows your fixed-pattern philosophy out of the water, I'm afraid.

As Scripture says:
"The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." John 3:8.
So, even before discerning any deeper implication of this text, it states quite plainly that the Spirit will not fit conventiently into one of your category labels.

The problem for me is then compounded: you continually try and illuminate me to the truth of my religion, yet continually make fiundamental errors in what you suppose we believe, so I can only assume your knowledge of other religions is equally, at best, uncertain ... and the grand synthesis that Theosophy assumes is doomed from the outset.

In the Ageless Wisdom teachings...

Who's 'Ageless Wisdom'?
I don't believe in such a thing. I believe wisdom to be the product of a lived life, not a book.

There is wisdom that is as old as man, but there is not some changeless and fixed quantity of stuff that can be known, that man taps into. Knowledge is not wisdom, nor do you need knowledge to be wise.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

"The Tao that can be named" may not be the Eternal Tao, but this doesn't mean we can't find points in common and discuss them.

Quite right ... but we should not lose sight of the first aspect.

If there is a Sophia Perennis it must surely have ONE trunk, just as the Bodhi Tree [hmmm] under which the Great One sat.

No, there you go again, you're trying to talk about that which you've just agreed can't be talked about ... what you're now talking about is not the real Tao.

Theosophists would never argue that it is best to dispense with exoteric religion, or eliminate positions which do not fit our individual interpretations and preferences.

But you do not practice a religion, that's the point. And because you don't you will ever be distant from the 'graces' conferred by those traditional forms, whatever form they may take.

Those who insist that "their religion is right," meaning often enough that in their blind zeal and fanaticism they would just as soon cleanse the world of the stain of all other belief systems, are usually the greatest xenophobes ...

Thine own lips have said it. Andrew, you're the one who rails out when someone doesn't accept your word as gospel ...

This is fine, so long as we stipulate that we are speaking of the Cosmos in Incarnation.

So long as we speak the words you want spoken, you mean? Sorry, but no.

You love to make this point elsewhere, yet Theosophists insist that it is the LOGOS Himself [Itself] Whom and which is Incarnating.

Well, as you have multiple logoses, or logoi, we are patently not talking about the same thing at all.

We do not believe that God created Cosmos ex nihilo...

Well there you go then ... we do, for a very good reason.

[for indeed, the LIVING MOTHER and Feminine Principle in the MacroCOSM is the VIRGIN, and Her Creation, thanks to the Seed provided by the FATHER is the 2nd Logos, the CHRIST Aspect in the MacroCOSM ... in short, the entire Created Cosmos, yes, literally!].

To you, not to me. Nowhere in Christian Scripture is the Blessed Virgin presented as the feminine principle of creation, this is Theosophical idolatry. She was a woman ... just a women ... I know its dreadfully mundane, but then, you assume her to be the personification of a quite exoteric principle really, whilst the Mystery of the Incarnation, where the real story lies, you just don't see.

Fohat IS the Holy Spirit. In the world of online video gaming, we call this - FAIL!

Andrew — not it's not, that's the whole point! Fohat is a Buddhist conceptual term ... so you immediately think it covers everything, which it doesn't.

You assume it to be, but then, as you've evidenced above, you're not too well informed about what the doctrine even says in the first place, so you're hardly in the position to make judgements.

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Yes, because Saul realized that LIKE JESUS he was capable of the Incarnation and expression of THE CHRISTOS.

Where does Paul say that?

Nowhere ... what He does say is that "we are buried in Christ" (Romand 6:4, Colossians 2:12) and he talks of the Mystical body of which Christ is the head, and we the members (Romans 12:4-5, 1 Corinthians 6:15, 19; 12:12 et seq; Ephesians 4:25, 5:30) ... so you're just making stuff up now ...

As for an "esoteric elite," let's get clear on something. The `elite' is certainly that, yet they ARE elite because they LISTENED.

Or because they have convinced themselves, and others, they are.

I have observed the characteristics of the saints and sages, and elitism isn't among them ...

God bless,

Thomas

 

[taijasi]

It's this kind of comment that indicates to me that the Dove, as you know Him, is evidently not the Dove I am talking about

Correct, I regard the Dove, as depicted in artwork such as the Baptism of Jesus at the River Jordan, as indicative of the presence of the Christ. Since I believe in two different individuals, one the Initiate Jesus, the other a higher Initiate, formerly Sri Krishna ... I find no problems whatsoever with my understanding and interpretation.

While you may not share it, Thomas, this in no way invalidates or lessens my understanding. I am not perturbed. I simply do not care that you don't see things my way. What? You say the testimony of blah blah blah supports your interpretation and understanding, and that the whole of the Christian tradition indicates otherwise?

Flapdoodle! I know what I believe and I'm sticking to it. When I have ANY good reason, based on direct experience or evidence to the contrary [that what I believe makes far, far more sense] ... THEN and only then will I reconsider. Basically, your stack of St. Augustine's writings and Meditations on the Tarot could be twelve miles high, but so long as my own experience does not corroborate their explanation ... I would have no reason to adjust my views. And yet you call me UNWISE, while you yourself define wisdom as APPLIED knowledge. [see below]

Thomas, what I have experienced proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my interpretation makes sense ... for ME. That it may not be right for you, for now, or even for nearly any other Christian at present, may be the case. Therefore, you must tread the path as you understand it, and leave me to tread MY OWN. To try and motivate me to tread your path would be wrong, however well-motivated you may be; and since I already feel comfortable that I'm on the right road [needing essentially to PRACTICE, and perhaps study & discuss a bit less], we will just have to call certain arguments a draw.

After all, I'm not arguing that your interpretation works for you, or even that it's what MOST Christians believe. To me, the Holy Spirit - in fairly simple terms - is Divine Mind, or that Inspiration and Higher Understanding which "was in Christ Jesus," and which St. Paul asked us to also give expression to. The experience of the Apostles at Pentecost demonstrates what kind of experience this can be. And although we may disagree on certain points, I hope we can at least both acknowledge that the Holy Spirit may work through any person who is sufficiently open to `receive' [on whatever level], provided his/her motivations & aim are proper ... which necessitates purity of thought, speech and character.

No, none of us [save Adepts] are as yet Perfected [see Ephesians 4:13 and Revelation 3:12] ... but we may certainly ASPIRE, and this is all that I claim I am trying to do, as so many whom I have met are likewise doing. That a great many of these have been moved, and are moved, by that same Spirit "which was in Christ Jesus," I can testify to ... and know as fact. I know this, because I know their fruits - and so can pretty much anyone who observes, provided s/he has open eyes and ears. When we remain closed to inspiration, for whatever reason, not even the Christ Himself could walk by and evoke a full recognition. I believe you will see this illustrated in what Jesus was not able to accomplish ... when he returned to his home town, and was accepted only as the MAN who the people had always known.

It is our unwillingness to believe, or to set aside currently held ideas and assumptions [about whatever] which, first and foremost, interferes with our ability to receive inspiration and empowerment from Spiritual sources ... including Angels, Adepts, Arhats and the 3rd Aspect. Were God [as the 1st Aspect] to COMMAND us to know and to believe, surely we then would grasp a thing - at whatever highest level of our capacity [something you might want to work out] - yet then whose reward would that understanding be, and what the heck would just have happened to our Free Will?

Thus, while the Holy Spirit never compels in the sense of violating our potentially free will, and while the Father aspect means, by definition, to work out the WILL ... it is only in the 2nd, or Christ Aspect, that we are able to bring all three of these into relation.

fixed-pattern philosophy

God, too, follows rules, Thomas. There is no author separate from them. LAWS mean that this is simply the way things work. No, we may not understand them, much less abide by them in or to the fullest ... but this is the requirement for us, in time. Since I believe I have an adequate enough understanding of these Laws of Being for myself, for the moment, then this is all I can work with. As I say, MY understanding makes the most sense to me, at present. The "fixed-pattern philosophy" is the affirmation that our Lord is a UNIVERSAL Lord, a Presence Whom and which can be found throughout Cosmos, regardless as to which planet we consider, which time period or what set of circumstances. ALWAYS there will be a `Christ,' just not quite what you seem to understand or expect as Christ.

Still, when it comes to being a Trinitarian and insisting on certain patterns, both of worship, divine affirmation and THINKING on such matters as how Christ manifests to us ... I believe the Catholics just take the cake. So I'd be careful about whose philosophy you're calling "FIXED." I say only that Universal PATTERNS govern all of manifested Reality, because I believe in an Ordered Universe, governed by a CONSISTENT Deity. No whim, no chance, no caprice and no tyranny. That Deity will not insist on everyman being a Catholic or a Christian, any more than Deity will try to force everyone into the neat little category of ___ [you fill in the blank].

Do I think Theosophists are the exception? Absolutely not. The most enlightened of disciples are often completely unaware of Theosophy, of Gnosticism, etc. ... and also completely uninterested in modern, `organized' religions. What a misnomer, after all, when there is NO tradition more segmented and broken than the Christian. No wonder they have no real way to accomplish some of their work through such avenues. There are dozens of other ways to reach the hearts and minds of those who thirst for righteousness, justice and understanding.

I need convince you of NOTHING, Thomas. Let's be clear on that. I will withdraw from this conversation, I think you will find ... because you tell me I do not understand the Christian tradition and teachings, and you are incorrect. Further, you assail and assault the very character and content of Theosophical teachings ... and become only further entrenched with a rigid, dogmatic Catholic foothold when folks like Nick or myself try to explain or dialogue with you. For Christ's sake, man, just look at the spaghetti strewn out all across this thread ... and tell me, WHERE is the focus of our discussion anymore ~ on the SOUL, I believe it was???

It is nothing but mudslinging, and while I accept part of the responsibility, I refuse to stoop to the level of a typical American politician! I spent a full hour in the grocery store last night listening to a very well-intentioned couple telling me about Jesus, God's PLAN for us/me for Salvation ... and you know what, I heard NOT ONE WORD that was new to me. They were a friendly couple, and listened to me as well ... our encounter beginning after they inquired about my health. I have a nasty cold, and they offered suggestions on where and how to treat it, etc.

There were further gestures, but I mention this because from the moment that the charismatic young man began babbling about the superiority of Israeli military firepower and how this indicates the strength of the Lord on the side of Israel, I knew that I was doomed. Further, as I suggested that there are meanings to the above two passages which I've referred to in this post [Ephesians and Revelations] pertaining to the teaching on Rebirth, I am sure that Joel and Christine equally felt that somehow, the conversation wasn't going quite as they anticipated.

Nothing was out of hand or uncivil, yet my heart sank a little as I realized the impasse at which we found ourselves. What encouraged me, in part, was the fact that there we were, sitting [standing] in the middle of the grocery store, keeping out of the way of passers-by, if attracting a little bit of interest and attention ... carrying on this peaceful, extended religious discussion, and no one was pushing or shoving, offending the other or otherwise acting uncivil.

That said, and after I spoke of how much HOPE this truly brings me regarding the future conditions of and chances for Humanity in the world to come ... I also recognized full well that aside from certain points of agreement outwardly, there was a definite gulf or set of discrepancies both in the beliefs, and in the means of Divine approach between this couple [and like-minded folk] and myself. The great point of COMMONALITY, or Communion, to which you have alluded, does indeed pertain to ALL SOULS in the world(s) where personality is transcended. But it is an inaccurate understanding to place the personality first in one's world-model, with the Soul as only a 2ndary entity, and a further mistake to believe that to agree in the world of the Soul requires the conscious `presence' of or activity of the lower self - the personality - to somehow VALIDATE that cooperation.

In short, the Soul knows only cooperation, for even while the Soul yet evolves, it has already passed through the stages of pain & suffering, strife & discord as our current Humanity now experiences, and seeks to move beyond. Thus, the Soul instructs, meditates, impresses and waits, for it knows well that true progress is often slow, if certain.

And YES, Thomas, we probably do have a different take on the Soul, based on our different personal and interpersonal experiences. I base my beliefs on a combination of direct experience, including meditation, study, service and reflective insight ... plus inspiration, instruction and the authority which moves through all persons, just inasmuch as we become receptive.

How about you?

THEOS SOPHIA means the Wisdom of God. In my book, it don't get any better than that. Yes, you may change this, mistranslate it, or seek to codify it - even with the best of intentions - in order to try and guide and inspire others along the Path to Godhead. This, of course, was done long before Christianity, as well as since.

What I adhere to, as most useful and instructional, and relevant for ME ... are certain teachings arising in the mid-19th Century, plus all throughout the 20th. These continue to inspire us into the early 21st, and I have WELL enough material now to guide me on the path, inasmuch as these kinds of resources may aid in that.

You are correct; true Wisdom comes from LIVINGNESS. And this, no Master, not even the Christ, can provide. It is something we must do.

On the Spiritual Path that I believe in, however, a Master is indispensable for certain stages. For that reason, I believe that I have been shown my own, met him, introduced and somewhat acquainted. I will say nothing more, except that MY path is for me, YOUR path is for you.

Let's focus on discussion of the SOUL from now on, okay Thomas?