Pentateuch Wisdom

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Andrew,

Here are some more quotes I found regarding the Firmament of Genesis 1:6.

“...there are two ‘Fires’ and a distinction is made between them in the Occult teachings. The first, or the purely Formless and invisible Fire concealed in the Central Spiritual Sun, is spoken of as ‘triple’ (metaphysically); while the Fire of the manifested Kosmos is Septenary, throughout both the Universe and our Solar System. ‘The fire or knowledge burns up all action on the plane of illusion,’ says the commentary." (SD vol 1 p 87)​

"In the Zohar, Darkness is called the strongest fire of the many different coloured (i.e. manifest) fires...." (Prem and Ashish, Man the Measure, p 105)​

“The great Dragon of Wisdom [The Universal Mind] is born of Fire and Water, and into Fire and Water will all be re-absorbed with him.” (SD vol I p. 470).​

“Behold [The Universal Mind] lifting the veil and unfurling it from east to west. He shuts out the above, and leaves the below to be seen as the great illusion. He marks the places for the shining ones, and turns the upper into a shoreless sea of fire, and the one manifested into the great waters.” (Stanza i-3-7)​

[Referring to the line in Stanza i-3-7 above,] “We are ... asked to behold the Mind lifting the Veil and unfurling it from East to West; lifting, as a banner is lifted and unfurled for display, which is here the display of manifestation. [Footnote: ‘...Compare the thought of this line with the Psalms of David, 104.2: "Who coverest thyself with light as which a garment Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain."] This Veil, the Abyss of the Kabbala, is that which separates the manifested cosmos from the unmanifest principles beyond, namely the utterly unmanifest One and the, to us, unmanifest Parents. It is the flrmament which divided the waters which were above from the waters which were beneath [the firmament in Genesis 1:6]; the veil of appearances which bright consciousness interposes between itself and the dark background out of which it arises. It is unfurled from the East, the Gateway of the Day, the Universal Mind, to the West, the Sunset Gate which leads to the Death Kingdoms, the world of the senses. Thus the whole gamut of manifested levels, from the highest to the lowest, is isolated from its background and emerges as a finite Cosmos. The Above, or unmanifest principles, are ‘shut out’, while the Below, or manifest principles, are left as the Great Illusion, the magic play or Maya.” (Prem and Ashish, Man the Measure, pp. 146-147)​

It is fascinating to think of Spirit (the Christian Father) as Dark Fire. It still amazes me that a Veil or Firmament was necessary to separate us from Spirit, but I suppose it was necessary. I was also surprised to find the scripture Psalms 104:2 as it applies to the Firmament.

 

[taijasi]

Re: Cosmic Fire

It is fascinating to think of Spirit (the Christian Father) as Dark Fire. It still amazes me that a Veil or Firmament was necessary to separate us from Spirit, but I suppose it was necessary. I was also surprised to find the scripture Psalms 104:2 as it applies to the Firmament.

You know, what's interesting ... is that I'm convinced I had a vision of this distinction, presumably in a dream - sometime about a week ago. The imagery is still fairly fresh in my mind, though I couldn't pinpoint exactly where, or how, it came to me - even the circumstances, really.

I have decided it was a dream, as it came right after you posted something about this distinction - how we exist, in the manner that I myself tend to understand as Sparks, "isolated" within the Divine Flame. Even my own imagery, which accompanies my abstract understanding, pales on comparison to this vision that presented itself. Somewhat two-dimensional, at least it was fairly fluidic, and I could sense how vital it was that this relationship be preserved ... until that day, `Be-With-Us,' as `The Secret Doctrine' puts it.

As for the Fires you have mentioned ... note that one of Alice Bailey's books is entitled, `A Treatise on Cosmic Fire,' being a somewhat difficult title, well over a thousand pages. It has been described as the psychological key to `The Secret Doctrine,' and you can find the book online, here ...

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Andrew,

I love that visualization of the Ray casting its light on the Waters of Genesis 1:6, causing billions of sparks of reflections to appear on tiny waves in the Waters. We are those sparks, and all of the sparks make up the totality called the Son (the universe).

I wonder why they left this visualization out of Genesis?

 

[bananabrain]

Re: ~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

they didn't. it's in the esoteric tradition. it just wasn't done as a "reflection on the waters" because that is a literalist reading of some very recondite concepts indeed - extending a metaphor to a bathetic degree.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[taijasi]

I imagine there's a great deal of imagery that could be used, or that would (almost naturally) come to mind, in contemplating our relationship to the above and beyond. It's noteworthy to me, that a great many people with a Judeo-Christian, or Muslim background, the People of the Book, will often anthropomorphize, when picturing or depicting Humanity's relationship to the Divine.

This phenonmenon isn't limited to strictly monotheistic traditions, however. Many cultures are in the habit of depicting the Gods in more or less human terms. Consider the Roman and Greek traditions, even where these pantheons sometimes include animal-headed human beings, as Thoth the Ibis-headed, or the Minoan Minotaur.

I am convinced that all such depictions - regardless of the tradition - are similar in that they are efforts to speak (in practical, everyday terms) of what Theosophy (borrowing from the Sanskrit, via Hinduism) calls the arupa worlds (formless, abstract) ... wherein our relationships with each other, and with the Divine, do not take the form of "Father" or "Mother" to son, daughter, etc.

Polarities of energy, predominances of Spirit vs. Matter can still occur in the Arupa worlds, but there is no such thing as gender in the way we know it, nor shape, size and appearance as we have come to understand them, as these all apply to the lower, RUPA worlds of time, space, and ideation.

Now let's see what HPB might have said about Arupa vs. Rupa:

Arupa (Sanskrit) [from a not + rupa form, body probably from the verbal root rup to form, figure, represent] Formless, bodiless; in Buddhism, used in a number of compounds, such as arupa-dhatu (the formless element), arupa-loka (world of the formless), and arupa-tanha (desire for rebirth in the formless sphere). Arupa, however, does not mean there is no form of any kind, but that the forms in the spiritual worlds are nonmaterial, highly ethereal and spiritual in type.

In the theosophic scheme of the septenary cosmos, the three higher planes are termed arupa planes, formless worlds, where form as we humans perceive it ceases to exist on our objective planes, while the four lower cosmic planes are called rupa-lokas or manifested planes (OG 6, 149). If the cosmos is viewed as a denary, then the three highest planes may be called arupa, while the seven manifested planes are the rupa worlds (Fund 240).
​

"The Formless ('Arupa') Radiations, existing in the harmony of Universal Will, and being what we term the collective or the aggregate of Cosmic Will on the plane of the subjective Universe, unite together an infinitude of monads -- each the mirror of its own Universe -- and thus individualize for the time being an independent mind, omniscient and universal; and by the same process of magnetic aggregation they create for themselves objective, visible bodies, out of the interstellar atoms" (SD 1:632-3).​

This last bit, from The SD, is in keeping with what we are discussing concerning the Monads.

Note that Arupa can apply both to a septenary as well as a denary system, thus I would think that Kabbalistic equivalents could be drawn quite easily. My guess is that the Arupa triad would correlate to Kether, Chokmah, and Binah ... would you agree, bananabrain?

 

[Thomas]

I imagine there's a great deal of imagery that could be used, or that would (almost naturally) come to mind, in contemplating our relationship to the above and beyond. It's noteworthy to me, that a great many people with a Judeo-Christian, or Muslim background, the People of the Book, will often anthropomorphize, when picturing or depicting Humanity's relationship to the Divine.

Indeed they do, however, it is understood from the outset that this is purely speaking by analogy and not, as some have suggested, that the monotheistic idea of God is a venerable old man with a long white beard, wearing a toga, etc., etc.

But I'm not sure one can make such a broad statement? Images of the Prophet and of Allah are forbidden by Islam, hence the richness of Islamic calligraphy. Similarly, Judaism forbids depictions of The Lord, and Christian art is at least shy of depicting The Father (Michaelangelo's Cistine Chapel a notable exception to the rule).

As we are made in His image and likeness, and stand at the apex of creation, the human is the 'best worst' exemplar of the Divine, the best working model we have, for all its faults ... and in one sense although man is closest to God, in another he has more in common with the meanest grain of dust than with the Deity.

The tendency to anthropomorphise is always there, and is always resisted. Arius' error was to read too much into spiritual anthropology, and certainly the Fathers saw the gnostics relied too heavily on anthropological qualities in their determinations of the syzergies that rendered their populist doctrines riddled with contradictions. The Stoics saw the same fault. Plato, of course, ridiculed the Olympian Pantheon, pointing out that the gods, for all their greatness, appeared to be subject to the worst human vices.

The Doctrine of the Trinity, for example, is emphatic that the paternal relation between Father and Son is the best natural and conceivable image, bit that it does not actually define the relationship as humanly understood ... the Trinity is like many things, but is none of them, and none of them are equivalent to the Trinity ...

In Christian theology the Divine is present in and through the Kosmos, a theophany, and the technical term used is usually 'vestige' or 'trace' ... (St Bonaventure, especially).

When an author deploys anthroposophical language one has to then examine who much the author is under the sway of his own imaginings ... sometimes more, sometimes less. Origen, for example, was accused of just such a failing, but I do not hold this to be the case. Likewise Augustine, whom the Orthodox accuse of being the most 'personalist' theologian, was rigorous in his guard against falling into error.

The examplar, in the Christian tradition, of course, is Aquinas, who disected language and its application with a forensic rigour that would put CSI to shame!

Buddhism, of course, sees all anthropology as purely transient, and as you have shown, Theosophy puts forward what Brahminism has always understood to be the case.

Thomas

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Andrew,

You are correct in your discussion of anthropomorphism. This is why anthropomorphism is forbidden in Theosophy. However, we have to wonder if anthropomorphism is necessary so that everyone can get some understanding out of the old stores. Would it be possible to say such anthropomorphizing is no longer necessary?

It might help to define the word Monad. As stated before, there were billions of sparks of Light reflecting in the Waters. Those sparks became what are called Monads — us.

 

[taijasi]

Re: Anthropomorphisms ...

It might help to define the word Monad. As stated before, there were billions of sparks of Light reflecting in the Waters. Those sparks became what are called Monads — us.

Understood ... though of course, even "spark" and "waters" are terms that help us to form an image of something taking place well into the Arupa levels!

As we are made in His image and likeness, and stand at the apex of creation, the human is the 'best worst' exemplar of the Divine, the best working model we have, for all its faults ... and in one sense although man is closest to God, in another he has more in common with the meanest grain of dust than with the Deity.

Note, of course, that this is a Christian, and/or Roman Catholic belief! By no means does this reflect what Theosophists, and I suspect a great many Hindus (even Buddhists) believe!

The entire point of the Theosophical Hierarchy thread, charts posted thereon, and ensuing discussion ... was to illustrate that we do have a place in the scheme of things, but that it is not - in our understanding (Nick's, mine, that of most esotericists) anywhere NEAR the "crown of creation," or apex.

In terms of material evolution, it might be accurate to say that Humanity currently represents the most evolved of forms. Yet the vehicle(s) of expression of a Master, even an Initiate or advanced disciple, differ as much from ours, as the equipment of the average intelligent person differs from that of an orangutan ... much along the lines of the comparison you mention, Thomas, between man and a mote of dust.

There is a SCALE, a Hierarchy of evolution, and this is one of the most wonderful things that Theosophy has done for us, imho, is to help us understand just where we fit - both individually, and as the Human collective, or Family - within the greater Scheme of things.

Esotericists believe in MANY rungs on the ladder of evolution, existing within the unseen worlds, and these must all be crossed, each rung touched in due sequence, in order to pass from rung A to rung Z. There is no skipping the middle parts; only a hastening of the process, and this is the Path of Initiation (with its earlier stages, the Paths of Aspiration and of Disicpleship).

Hand in hand with a teaching regarding the existence of the Arupa worlds, is an emphasis on the princples of Consciousness which allow all beings to operate within those worlds (with Being as the obvious underpinning, something simply taken for granted both in the ancient Eastern traditions and in contemporary esotericism). Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, Masters and men - all of these have an Atma, a Buddhi, and a Manas. Presumably, and from what I have gathered after much, much discussion with you, Thomas, Christianity and/or Roman Catholicism does not acknowledge, or allow for, such a state of things.

In repeated emphasis upon the idea of experiential states transcending the intellectual - what Theosophy calls the Arupa worlds (Atma and Buddhi, certainly, though even Higher Manas, or Spiritual Mind, is technically a-rupa) - I have begun to wonder, Thomas, if it makes sense to you at all, that we believe in an evolution which does proceed into, and even BEYOND, these extremely subtle states (or worlds) ...

That we can conceive of such worlds, does not, in & of itself, prove a thing! Nor does belief in such a figure as Christ Jesus, of course, mean any more than that, at face value. Yet to perhaps go somewhere with this line of reasoning, suppose for a moment that you literally beheld Christ Jesus, in the flesh, standing right before you!

What does that prove?

Now you see, for a Christian, or a Roman Catholic, it might mean one thing. But for myself, as an esotericist, it will quite possibly (if not likely) mean another thing entirely! For Nick, we may find that it means yet a third thing, and even if he and I will say later (if we happened to witness it together), "That was a Master!" ... it may be that we do not entirely agree on which Master it was!

Perhaps it does not matter, beyond a certain point, who it was we saw (which Master). Indeed, it would be - purely academic (meaning, according to one of Webster's definitions: having no practical or useful significance).

What does matter? I think that THIS is where we can go with such a gedankenexperiment.

Does the Roman Catholic, or Christian interpretation of the above event translate into the literal witnessing of the 2nd Person of the Trinity? In some cases, would a person not say, "I saw GOD"? And in terms of the latter expression, are there not some people who might LITERALLY believe this?

Again, we might say that it is academic. And I rather think that how such an experience would affect us is of much more significance than how we end up labeling it ... yet the issue of interpretation will have everything to do with just what we do next, and tomorrow, and ten years down the road.

Some people, I am convinced, would as soon stand and argue with God, till they turn blue in the face, as act accordingly - and abundantly.

Then again, even had we "objective, physical proof" of God's existence ... so what? In other words, what does THAT mean? Begging, of course, a good many more questions!

More than likely, you will not find either myself or Nick believing that it is even remotely likely for us to "see" God, as such, in the near or immediate future ... although esoterically, such a thing does happen at the 3rd Initiation. Still, a Mahatma can appear to darn near anyone, but even assuming some degree of recognition (again, what does this mean?) - so what? What happens "next?"

I think all of this is relevant to the topic of anthropomorphisms, because a Master, esoterically, is a member of a Kingdom truly beyond Humanity. Nick may or not be familiar with this teaching, yet it runs along the lines that from the Mineral, or 1st Kingdom, we pass in our evolution to the 2nd - Vegetable, the 3rd - Animal, the 4th - Human, and the 5th - Spiritual.

The 5th Kingdom has many appellations. The Kingdom of Souls, the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom of Heaven ... are all notable. Also, the Spiritual Hierarchy, where this is inclusive of 3rd and 4th degree Initiates, not simply Masters and beyond. Esoterically, your Soul and mine are already Masters, yet this is only true in the Spiritual worlds (of Higher Mind and beyond) ... and certainly not in terms of outward manifestation. In simple terms, this is ALL that distinguishes us from a Master, or the Christ, as defined by the expression "just men, made perfect," or again, in Ephesians 4:13.

Yet a 6th Kingdom most certainly also exists - definable as Shamballa, or `the Father's House,' the "Center where the Will of God is Known," according to The Great Invocation. Speaking in terms of the Greater Spiritual Hierarchy, we collapse these Kingdoms together, yet members of the 6th Kingdom are already beginning the Way of Higher Evolution ... and some are certainly focused almost exclusively on matters beyond our ken - which, strictly speaking do not really concern Human Evolution at all!

What pompous, arrogant, self-centered, ego-centric, short-sighted, naive creatures we are (!!!) ... to think that we have been created "a little lower than the angels," and not realize that this refers to our Spiritual Being, and not at all the MATERIAL!!!

So much for Earthly Stewardship ... we have turned dominion into outright, tyrannical domination, and we know, whether we admit it or not, that this is an abomination!!!

What then, are we to make, of the gentleman next to us on the subway car, who wears a contented smile, sitting full of presence but comfortably so, greeting everyone warmly with his eyes ... never speaking a word, and not giving the slightest hint of the true state of things?

He is a Master of the Wisdom, living upon and from the Farther Shore, yet fixed in his gaze upon the cave wall every bit as fully as we are (infinitely more so, in one sense) ... entirely by choice. Nothing can perturb him, a catastrophe will not disturb him. He is delivering a lecture a thousand miles away while he rides the subway car, smiling.

Masters speak in a Cockney accent when that is the need of the moment. They are known to smoke imaginary cigars, though today I suppose among certain youth the in thing would be cigarrettes ... yet whatever are the circumstances in which the Master needs to appear, he will blend in. Chances are, that no one will recognize him for exactly who and what he is - unless this is exactly what is needed and necessary, to assist with the Master's Work.

And that Work, although the evolutionary emphasis and various factors have certainly evolved, remains essentially unchanged ... even over thousands upon thousands of years, and this - in the very least - is often the TERM of Service which the Master accepts ... during which time he will work often beyond the world of outer manifestation altogether, yet today - increasingly IN THEM.

As for `God,' or at least, that part, that Aspect of God, Whom and which has dwelled with us on Planet Earth for 18 million years ... being known by a thousand appellations, and by Moses as simply "I AM," we have learned this:

The Planetary Logos of our earth scheme, one of the Seven Spirits before the throne, took physical incarnation, and, under the form of Sanat Kumara, the Ancient of Days, and the Lord of the World [aka the Youth of Endless Summers, and the Fountainhead of the Will, showing forth as Love], came down to this dense physical planet and has remained with us ever since. Owing to the extreme purity of His nature, and the fact that He is (from the human standpoint) relatively sinless, and hence incapable of response to aught on the dense physical plane, He was unable to take a dense physical body such as ours, and has to function in His etheric body. He is the greatest of all the Avatars, or Coming Ones, for He is a direct reflection of that great Entity who lives, and breathes, and functions through all the evolutions on this planet, holding all within His aura or magnetic sphere of influence. In Him we live and move and have our being, and none of us can pass beyond the radius of His aura. He is the Great Sacrifice, Who left the glory of the high places and for the sake of the evolving sons of men took upon Himself a physical form and was made in the likeness of man. He is the Silent Watcher, as far as our immediate humanity is concerned, although literally the Planetary Logos Himself, on the higher plane of consciousness whereon He functions, is the true Silent Watcher where the planetary scheme is concerned. Perhaps it might be stated thus:—That the Lord of the World, the One Initiator, holds the same place in connection with the Planetary Logos as the physical manifestation of a Master holds to that Master's Monad on the monadic plane. In both cases the intermediate state of consciousness has been superseded, that of the Ego or higher self, and that which we see and know is the direct self-created manifestation of pure spirit itself. Hence the sacrifice. It must here be borne in mind that in the case of Sanat Kumara there is a tremendous difference in degree, for His point in evolution is as far in advance of that of an adept as that adept's is in advance of animal man. (Initiation Human and Solar, p.29)​

The prophet Daniel recorded his vision of Sanat Kumara, whom he called "the Ancient of Days." Daniel writes,

"I beheld till the thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool. His throne was like the fiery flame and his wheels as burning fire. [His chakras.]​

"A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him. Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him.​

"I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.​

"And there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all people, nations and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."​

Hmmm ... food for thought, and more, as I go out to enjoy the bright sunshine of this glorious afternoon!

Namaskar,

~andrew

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Andrew,

You said,

"...even "spark" and "waters" are terms that help us to form an image of something taking place well into the Arupa levels!"​

--> That is the curse of being an esotericist. We can only describe formless cosmic principles in language we are accustomed to — waters, sparks, etc. Of course we do not literally mean real water, etc.

"...it is not - in our understanding (Nick's, mine, that of most esotericists) anywhere NEAR the "crown of creation," or apex."​

--> Ahh, if we were only one step away from perfection, as Christians say! No, we have many, many more steps to go. Fortunately, we have countless billions of years to do them in.

"Yet the vehicle(s) of expression ... differ as much from ours, as the equipment of the average intelligent person differs from that of an orangutan ..."​

--> It is even more so, because, because of the planes of existence that are invisible to us here on the physical plane.

"...I have begun to wonder, Thomas, if it makes sense to you at all, that we believe in an evolution which does proceed into, and even BEYOND, these extremely subtle states (or worlds) ..."​

--> Andrew, there is no such concept as Rupa or Arupa in Christianity. You are asking them to conceptualize something their religion does not teach. I am afraid you will encounter resistence in their learning such ideas.

"...you will not find either myself or Nick believing that it is even remotely likely for us to "see" God...."​

--> Ahh, but we see Heaven between each reincarnation.

"The 5th Kingdom has many appellations."​

--> Geoffrey Barborka calls it the Dhyani-Chohan Kingdom.

"Chances are, that no one will recognize [a Master] for exactly who and what he is - unless this is exactly what is needed and necessary, to assist with the Master's Work."​

--> This reminds me of the quote:

"Waiting the word of the Master, ​

Watching the Hidden Light; ​

Listening to catch His Orders ​

In the very midst of the fight​

"Seeing His slightest signal ​

Across the head of the throng; ​

Hearing His faintest whisper ​

Above earth's loudest song."​

Modern Theosophy: At The Feet of the Master, Alcyone

"And that Work, although the evolutionary emphasis and various factors have certainly evolved, remains essentially unchanged ... even over thousands upon thousands of years, and this - in the very least - is often the TERM of Service which the Master accepts ... during which time he will work often beyond the world of outer manifestation altogether, yet today - increasingly IN THEM."​

--> Andrew, I wonder if it is even wise to discuss the Masters with people who are not approaching the Path. Even Blavatsky herself dropped a lawsuit one time, when that lawsuit started to get the Masters involved.

 

[taijasi]

"...I have begun to wonder, Thomas, if it makes sense to you at all, that we believe in an evolution which does proceed into, and even BEYOND, these extremely subtle states (or worlds) ..."

​

--> Andrew, there is no such concept as Rupa or Arupa in Christianity. You are asking them to conceptualize something their religion does not teach. I am afraid you will encounter resistence in their learning such ideas.

Yes and no. This is true, on the one hand, but Thomas is as familiar with the Greek idea of Nous as you and I are of Buddhi!

Now let us look at what two prominent Greek philosophers had to say about the Nous:

Plato described it as the immortal, rational part of the soul. This aspect of the world soul is the part that brings reasoned order to the universe. It is a godlike kind of thinking in which the truths of conclusions are immediately known without having to understand the preliminary premises. ​

Plotinus described nous as one of the emanations from divine being.​

These two, brief summaries are from Wikipedia, but lest Thomas accuse us of poor scholarship, and squirm with the notion these presentations are somehow lacking ... let us look direct to The Enneads for more of Plotinus' view:

Plotinus maintains, the Intelligence (nous) is an independent existent, requiring nothing outside of itself for subsistence. The Intelligence (nous) may be understood as the storehouse of all potential beings, however only if every potential being is also recognized as an eternal and unchangeable thought in the Divine Mind. Plotinus refers to the Intelligence as God (theos).​

I prefer to stick with Plato's definition, for the moment, especially what I have highlighted, and underlined, in blue. This is what Master Morya calls `Straight Knowledge,' it is what we are usually in the custom (as Esotericists) as calling `the Intuition,' and it is also the specific operation of the faculty of Buddhi. As such, it is at one and the same time beyond Intellect (both lower AND Higher Manas) ... yet it has also been called PURE REASON.

Now this faculty, of which every human being is innately possessed - because "God-given," as the Christian would say - need only be AWAKENED, or stimulated into activity, though it is inherently understood in esoteric teachings that this may require many, many lifetimes in the doing. This by no means precludes one from beginning the process in this very lifetime, but it dispenses with the false notion in exoteric Buddhism - encouraging, yet inaccurate - that ANY person can attain the highest Enlightenment in "THIS very lifetime."

Still, the faculty of Buddhi is NOT something we must pray for, or ask God to bestow upon us ... nor is it something that can be taken away, or "withheld." As such, it will then not fall at all under the category of Grace, though we might - accurately enough - say that its mere presence within us, as the Spiritual Soul, is Grace.

Beyond, of course, the Buddhic faculty, is that of ATMA(N) ... but that goes beyond the scope of what Plato and Plotinus are speaking of, as even Buddhi is somewhat a greater notion than the Individual part of our Soul. Buddhi is equivalent to the World Soul, yet one cannot speak of an incarnate, Individual human life (jivatma) without the Buddhi (even ATMA-Buddhi-Manas) being part and parcel of such an entity ...

--> Andrew, I wonder if it is even wise to discuss the Masters with people who are not approaching the Path. Even Blavatsky herself dropped a lawsuit one time, when that lawsuit started to get the Masters involved.

Agreed, and understood, yet the path of Probationary, or pledged discipleship ... is certainly the beginning of the road that leads to Accepted Discipleship and Initiation. One can even dispute the existence of the Masters, and be far along on that Path ...

I'm convinced that it's worth sharing something of the reality of the Masters, and of their students, simply to ensure that the concepts are out there, and in order to provide people with a hint of reality ...

Now, as for getting the old horse to drink - that we have no business attempting. Christ, in the Aquarian age, is "the Water of Life, poured forth for thirsty men." The fact of the matter is, the flowing Waters will not cease, nor will their flow be increased or lessened for ANY man or being ... and if we think of the three worlds which form our field of Service as the pool, then our only real job is to make sure that we continue to pour forth these waters - as "little Christs," as best we are able.

I guess you could think of it in terms of "little Buddhas" if it is more suiting to you, Nick, but at heart I am (or seek to be) a Christian .. since I believe we, many of us, are doing the best we can to follow upon His Teaching(s), and tread the Path, behind Him, which He helped to show us.

Some have trodden the Path of the Buddha, before Him (Buddha as the Bodhisattva, or World Teacher of the prior cycle) ... including many of the Masters we now know, and the 900 Arhats who have moved on towards Liberation. Maitreya will lead 9000 such Arhats toward Enlightenment ... while there's no telling (90,000?) how many will follow the Master KH.

A rose, by any other name ...


Yes, after a certain point, there's not much that can, or should be said, about the Great Ones. Something or other about a mob, turning and rending us. As they shouted in JC Superstar:

Crucify Him! Crucify Him!
Crucify Him! Crucify Him! Crucify Him!
​

But I am making a point here, which touches on things (essentially one thing) that have been said in the past, on many threads, many times. And it is clear that the Greeks - even Aristotle, the most pragmatic and scientific of the great Philosophers - definitely believed in mankind as possessing a consciousness beyond the normal, rational Intellect.

We can speak of this from within the context of ANY tradition we choose, and I am convinced that even Christianity (yes, EVEN Christianity) ... has not shut itself off from the Pierian Spring.

Would that every one, who seeks to embody the virtue, the inspiration and the example of Humanity's Greatest ... be willing to come to terms on this matter of our Divine Heritage (and the possibility which exists before us ALL).

The possibility is an inevitability, let us say for 99.999% of the 60 billion, even if we believe, as esotericists, that two fifths of the 60 billion shall complete their evolution AFTER the great `Judgment Day' of the following Round.

This is a question, in the last analysis, of time. And it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with blindly accepting or following the CREDO of some latter-day, exoteric religion - one among many, here on our little speck of dirt in the outer spiral arm of this little spot, in Cosmos. Especially when one religion tells us X, another tells us Y, and yet a third suggests Z, each one denying what the OTHER has suggested, and insisting that IT ALONE holds the "way" to `Salvation.'

No, I think we have addressed the idea of Salvation, from an esoteric viewpoint - minus a point or two about `Judgment Days' in the Greater Scheme of things ... and we have gone out of our way to show that NO ONE is "left behind," or unaccounted for in the Theosophical view.

Sure, even a small CHILD could propose a better system than, some people will make it "to Heaven," and be "eternally happy" - while the rest perish in a burning hell of eternal misery and torment ... and I would humbly submit that precisely such is how we need to approach this, if we have forgotten that most unambiguous lesson of Matthew 18:3.

The conversion that is called for - clearly being one from vice into virtue, and from unrighteousness into righteous living - has been so misinterpreted, so distored and even WILLfully twisted, by the theologians and ecclesiastics of the day, that the Theosophists and Esotericists well have their work cut out for them ... even for many ages to come!

Still, there is no shortage of Living Waters, only an unwillingness, ofttimes, on the part of men (and women) to make the necessary sacrifices. PROVE to me that there are Mahatmas, says the doubting ... umm, gentleman.

And we respond, DEMONSTRATE, as the Great Ones of ALL times have asked - that you are fit, and ready, to receive the teachings, and the Truth ... and there will be no short supply of Teachers, and of Wisdom-Bearers come before you (both as living Representatives of the Perennial Tradition, as well as literature, the material vehicles for the Wisdom Teachings). It is not expected that the layperson will immediately recognize, or identify, or understand, but upon study and persistent, determined effort, one CANNOT BUT meet with results.

The man of short patience simply snaps his fingers and expects the sea to part. When it does not, he proclaims this notion of Superhuman powers a sham, and retreats to the comfort of the better established, exoteric tales ... even if these, removed by only a few more centuries, often depict exactly the kind of "miracles" which he cannot accept from "that other tradition."

And the BASIS for this unwillingness to consider the magnificence of what is practically right under his nose?

Ah well, I WILL be frank, for a moment. If you work on a farm, long enough, there is a certain degree to which one becomes well accustomed to the smell of manure. And there's nothing wrong with that. Let us be clear - fertilizer, in terms of the Earth's ecosystem, and growth cycles, has a definite and necessary FUNCTION.

So too, in terms of the world of fecund ideas, there is a necessity for the manure which we see shoveled, sometimes rather heavily, when it comes to this and that. One man's "****" ... and so forth.

I can shovel it plenty well, just as the next guy, but there are those whose job it is to PLANT THE SEEDS. And so they do, not complaining, and not offended in the slightest when the pot calls the kettle black. Who's doing the shoveling? Ah well ...

You can put a Rose under this here man's nose, and what does he smell?

He says, "Get that crap outta here, I'd much rather smell this here sh*t."

Can we blame him? There's a world of people out there to love, a Field of Service that demands my/our attention, so what the hell am I doing here in front of this computer screen?

I'm shoveling ****.

But somewhere, in the sifting around through all this fertilizer, and in the exchanging of an idea or two, here and there, even if we miss 90% of the value of what the other man has said ... I'm still convinced (and nothing can shake this from me) - that we are working towards a better day, and a time when there's a bit less shoveling, and a whole lot more seed-planting.

Someone's got to do the shoveling, but since 90% of these damn seeds are still falling on unfertile ground, even despite all this damn ****-shoveling we've got going on ... ... then hmmm, what might things be like, if 99% of the seeds DID FALL on fertile soil, and take root, and spring up, and bear fruit?

What then?

In an ideal, efficient system (a Master's Ashram operates with Divine Efficiency, bordering upon Perfection) ... it is known that many of the seeds scattered will not take immediate root, and bear fruit, but it is also known that not a single thought cast into the ethers of Space, is without its positive result.

I suppose the inverse is true, and thus we are taught to guard our thoughts, words and actions ... and to act, at all times, as if the eyes of the entire Ashram were upon us. (They are!)

One should be careful to avoid the fifth of the Anantarika-karmas ... and yes, I think we can reach a point where Silence is the only voice we have left with which to speak.

Not sure if we're there yet, but we'll see ...

Namaskar,

andrew

 

[Nick the Pilot]

~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~

Andrew,

You said,

"...the faculty of Buddhi is NOT something we must pray for, or ask God to bestow upon us...."

--> Correct. It must be earned, like a college degree, like everything else of value.

"...the path of Probationary, or pledged discipleship ... is certainly the beginning of the road that leads to Accepted Discipleship and Initiation."

--> Certainly, both of us are talking about what happens when a person decides to join the Path. But this is a decision they must make for themself, and no one can help them with this decision. And, without question, we are not allowed to proselytize them towards this goal. Because of these limitations, the number of people knocking on the door to the Path is small, and there is not much we can do about it. All we can do is be role models, live the exemplary life, and teach by example. Only if one sees how we live and ask what it is that makes us live they way we do, can we even consider discussing how to speed up progress to the Path. We teach by example, not by prostelytizing.

The other factor is karma. Many people have remarked they have had the good karma to find Theosophy in this lifetime. The bottom line is, many people do not have the "good" karma to find Theosophy yet, and there is nothing we can do about it.

"One can even dispute the existence of the Masters, and be far along on that Path ..."

--> The good new is, if they are willing to dispute the Masters, that means the Masters are on their minds, and they are ready to hear about the Masters.

"I'm convinced that it's worth sharing something of the reality of the Masters, and of their students, simply to ensure that the concepts are out there, and in order to provide people with a hint of reality ..."

--> It is a plus/minus situation. It would be nice to get the word out. On the other hand, the Masters are very busy, and if we bring them another load of negativity, it might interefere with what they are already doing. It is a situation that requires great balance.

"...but at heart I am (or seek to be) a Christian...."

--> Theosophy does NOT ask anyone to stop being a Christian. It only asks that Christians re-apply original teachings that have been intentionally removed from Christianity. Theosophy is not anti-Christianity. It is pro-teachings, like teaching who the "us" people in Genesis 1:26 were, and why that teaching has been intentionally removed from the Bible (along with a long list of other teachings that have been intentionally removed).

"... .. since I believe we, many of us, are doing the best we can to follow upon His Teaching(s), and tread the Path, behind Him, which He helped to show us."

--> This is exactly what Theosophy is trying to do.

"Some have trodden the Path of the Buddha, before Him...."

--> ...And the lost history of what has gone on before, is what Theosophy teaches. Entire civilizations have disappeared, and Theosophy reintroduces the lessons that were learned (and forgottn) at that time.

"Crucify Him! Crucify Him!"

--> Yes, there are those people who would say such things about the Masters. No, we must not cause more negative events like these.

"...the Greeks - even Aristotle, the most pragmatic and scientific of the great Philosophers - definitely believed in mankind as possessing a consciousness beyond the normal, rational Intellect."

--> It is the task of Theosophy to re-teach that have become lost in the march of history, like the example you have pointed out.

"...I am convinced that even Christianity (yes, EVEN Christianity) ... has not shut itself off from the Pierian Spring."

--> We can only hope we can turn closed-mindedness into open-mindedness. Alas, you seem more optimistic than me.

"...two fifths of the 60 billion shall complete their evolution AFTER the great `Judgment Day' of the following Round."

--> Perhaps the best thing we can do is tell them they will be held responsible for everything they do (just like the Bible says), instead of letting them think a certain religious ritual will "save" them from accountability.

"Especially when one religion tells us X, another tells us Y, and yet a third suggests Z, each one denying what the OTHER has suggested, and insisting that IT ALONE holds the "way" to `Salvation.' "

--> Any religion that tells me a great man will go to Hell just because he does not belong to the right religion is no religion at all.

"...I think we have addressed the idea of Salvation...."

--> We have. It is called Nirvana, which is a whole lot fairer than anything else I have seen, by far.

"...we have gone out of our way to show that NO ONE is "left behind," or unaccounted for in the Theosophical view."

--> ...And, no other system can make that claim.

"...if we have forgotten that most unambiguous lesson of Matthew 18:3."

--> I am not Christian. Refresh my memory.

"The conversion that is called for - clearly being one from vice into virtue, and from unrighteousness into righteous living - has been so misinterpreted, so distored and even WILLfully twisted, by the theologians and ecclesiastics of the day, that the Theosophists and Esotericists well have their work cut out for them ... even for many ages to come!"

--> I believe the day of universal understanding is closer than you think. Then it will be only a matter of enjoying the bad karma and burning off the bad karma we have earned. This is a not-too-distant day I am very much looking forward to.

"PROVE to me that there are Mahatmas, says the doubting ... umm, gentleman."

--> The best response is, when you have earned the good karma to enjoy their teachings, your proof will arrive on that day.

"It is not expected that the layperson will immediately recognize, or identify, or understand, but upon study and persistent, determined effort, one CANNOT BUT meet with results."

--> Assuming they have the karma to allow such an event to happen.

"...there are those whose job it is to PLANT THE SEEDS."

--> Plant, yes. Proselytize, no. We teach by example.

"...that we are working towards a better day, and a time when there's a bit less shoveling, and a whole lot more seed-planting."

--> That is the promise of Theosophy. In Christianity, if someone does not get it right in one lifetime, they are done for. Theosophy, on the other hand, offers the same person hundreds of second chances. (This gets back to Theosophy being much fairer than anything else I have seen.)

"...if 99% of the seeds DID FALL on fertile soil, and take root, and spring up, and bear fruit? What then?"

--> Theosophy promises that day WILL COME someday. Theosophy is the very picture of optimism.

"In an ideal, efficient system (a Master's Ashram operates with Divine Efficiency, bordering upon Perfection) ... it is known that many of the seeds scattered will not take immediate root, and bear fruit, but it is also known that not a single thought cast into the ethers of Space, is without its positive result."

--> This is where Theosophy shines. Progress is slow — much slower than most people realize. But it is supposed to be slow. We should not try to rush things.

"...I think we can reach a point where Silence is the only voice we have left with which to speak."

(1) Teach by example.

(2) Remain silent until asked.