... to have a knack for these things!
Looks like a ship's schematic diagram. Very easy to read.
surprised Andrew? lolv/r
Joshua
Theosophical Hierarchy
- Thread starter Nick the Pilot
- Start date
Looks like a ship's schematic diagram. Very easy to read.
surprised Andrew? lolv/r
Joshua
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
Oh not at all! It's been said, mathematics is the language of God ...Quahom said:
I know, maybe it's something about the relationship between 1 and 10 (1X10, the relationship of the lower to the higher, or imperfection to relative perfection) ... then 10X10 again, or relative perfection raised to the power of the Divine!Nick the Pilot said:
... like, along the lines of our relationship to the Soul, then again to the Monad.
Lots of reaching I guess, since it really comes down to my faux pas, plain & simple.
But what's a couple of decimal places when you get to the several trillions ...
Francis king
Well-Known Member
ooh, such pretty colours...
Francis king
Well-Known Member
but what use is it?
Well, if one intended to build something...it would be considered a blueprint or diagram. Or if one intended to explain something, then it is a schematic in reflection of what was being described. Problem is, not everyone is visually oriented, so 2/3rds lose "sight" of the originator's intent...
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
Right on all counts, Q. Some look out at the world, understand it as the "Creator's Canvas" (or by way of a similar metaphor), then are drawn into a reverie regarding the Divine Artist.
For the Egyptians, the term often used was `Master Builder' ( think `Baka' from the movie, `The Ten Commandments,' portrayed by the actor Vincent Price). This motif comes down to us today in Freemasonry ... just as the acronym TGAOTU - The Great Architect of the Universe!
So, while the charts are really designed to assist all students, it is known that not all students will benefit as fully, while some will not take much interest at all. I rather think today's multimedia (AV in general, but especially CG) will come to supersede some of the older charts ... yet never have I seen the geometry, and the detail, as provided in DK's Solar & Planetary Schemes of evolution.
I have a few more that essentially bring this series into the second half of a natural progression ... so that, in a word, Francis, the combined series can help to show something of our place in Cosmos, as also our place in the "lesser Scheme of things" (meaning - Earth's own evolution, as relating to that of other planets in our own Solar System, our closest neighbors).
The second series of charts show direct, practical - though also symbolic and representational - relationships ... with relevance to esoteric Meditation, even to the point of demonstrating (from one point of view) what it is that all students are seeking to accomplish. And again, the detail may not appeal to everyone equally. In the very least, however, one hopes to get the general idea.
It's not that such charts - as those that depict the chakras - have not existed in the past. They date back thousands of years in the instruction of the Far East. But show me where AAB or HPB just "ripped this stuff off, and badly sorted it," Francis ... and I'll show you some beachfront property in Wyoming. You won't believe the prices!!!
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
I have studied the teachings, upon which these images are based (provided by that Teacher), for ~17 years. I have meditated, and I have experienced the Service Aspect wherein we put into practice all that we have learned.
And while my understanding is far from complete, and often a bit leaning on the side of over-intellectualism, I still think that these charts are useful, as they were provided to help us understand what is taking place between Soul and personality, as the process of at-one-ment is carried forth.
One's effort, and interest, in the esoteric path usually begins with study. Whatever devotion, and the more emotional side of aspiration, that is in the disciple (a probationary chela, a `student') ... will lead him or her to look further within, to press on beyond the outer husks, and to penetrate closer to the heart of the Mysteries.
In this search, I think we all find that there is much more to the esoteric path than any set of teachings will provide. Even if one finds that HPB's writings are a suitable "textbook" (or study course) for the time being, we cannot for long deceive ourselves and believe that the wisdom has somehow been translated, and reduced to a few words (or even long treatises) on the printed page. This desire to make a paper pope out of the Gupta Vidya must be overcome.
DK's chart regarding Meditation must thus be taken with a grain of salt, as also those showing the relationships between the various force centres (chakras) and the Solar Lotus (the 12-petalled Sahasrara, or `Heart within the Head' - the esoteric heart center, with its correspondence to the Anahata, or exoteric heart center).
Again and again, DK stresses that to understand the Soul in terms of the Solar Lotus, hovering above the head of the student, is to concretize and conceptualize that which is essentially beyond these forms of materiality and concrete thought. The Soul Itself actually exists within, or upon, the plane of Higher Mind ... yet even to say such a thing, and to draw lines on a chart, with a "pretty flower" (I will try to anticipate your most astute observations here, Francis) - is to REIFY an inner relationship, and state of things which is really still beyond our understanding.
Not that some mystics, and esotericists (certainly those who have been very gifted and carefully trained clairvoyants), haven't actually observedthe realities which are here being conveyed in chart form. But even when they do observe the Soul, it is always stated that there is NO HOPE of fully communicating the vision, whether that has been the Soul as a Being, or in terms of the "form-side," including the structure of the Solar Lotus in the Causal Body (Karana Sarira, eh Francis?).
So, the charts only go so far. They are hard to read, in terms of some of the small notation, except in print ... and perhaps that is fine. The set of relationships, and correspondences, both between the various centers of all the bodies, as well as between the centers, the petals of the Solar Lotus, and the central JEWEL contained therein (the Monad, the Spark - of blue, Electrical, `Cosmic Fire') ... is something I find quite fascinating.
What more can I make of it, after all, except what I bring to it from my own experiences and insights?
But when once we start to begin to MAYBE parse a few things together ...
eg, OM MANI PADME HUM (Om! The Jewel is in the Lotus!) - Hmmmm ...
- ah well, the `Aha!' is unforgettable, and I truly think we are forever changed, for it.
Master M. says, "Read less, meditate more." And they all seem to say, SERVICE is what we're really here for. Even meditation, as a form of Service, is sometimes not the Dharma for which we are called, in a given moment, or phase of life. All three, seem vital for spiritual progress.
NAMASKAR
Oh, and FYI, if you want the symbolism, and esoteric meaning, regarding some of the coloring of the Solar Lotus in the third chart ... you'll just have to read `A Treatise on Cosmic Fire' (or as much of the 1283 pages that moves you ). It was provided as the "psychological and symbolic key" to HPB's `Secret Doctrine.'
). It was provided as the "psychological and symbolic key" to HPB's `Secret Doctrine.'
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
-- double post -- (goofy software bug)
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
Andrew,
You said,
"Even if one finds that HPB's writings are a suitable "textbook" (or study course) for the time being, we cannot for long deceive ourselves and believe that the wisdom has somehow been translated, and reduced to a few words (or even long treatises) on the printed page."
--> The difficult thing about Blavatsky's writings is that, there is so much information it is easy to get lost in all of it. (I have dedicated myself to bringing order and sequence to her writings.)
"...and the central JEWEL contained therein (the Monad, the Spark - of blue, Electrical, `Cosmic Fire')...."
--> This is why I prefer Theosophy over Christianity. In Christianity, people go from nothing to human to perfected in about 80 years. In Theosophy, such perfection takes billions of years -- which makes more sense to me.
"OM MANI PADME HUM (Om! The Jewel is in the Lotus!)"
--> Have you heard the Theosophical interpretation of "The Jewel is in the Lotus"? The jewel is the Monad, and the lotus is the human body. When I think of it that way, it makes a lot of sense to me.
You said,
"Even if one finds that HPB's writings are a suitable "textbook" (or study course) for the time being, we cannot for long deceive ourselves and believe that the wisdom has somehow been translated, and reduced to a few words (or even long treatises) on the printed page."
--> The difficult thing about Blavatsky's writings is that, there is so much information it is easy to get lost in all of it. (I have dedicated myself to bringing order and sequence to her writings.)
"...and the central JEWEL contained therein (the Monad, the Spark - of blue, Electrical, `Cosmic Fire')...."
--> This is why I prefer Theosophy over Christianity. In Christianity, people go from nothing to human to perfected in about 80 years. In Theosophy, such perfection takes billions of years -- which makes more sense to me.
"OM MANI PADME HUM (Om! The Jewel is in the Lotus!)"
--> Have you heard the Theosophical interpretation of "The Jewel is in the Lotus"? The jewel is the Monad, and the lotus is the human body. When I think of it that way, it makes a lot of sense to me.
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Andrew,
You said,
"I know that not every Theosophist is a student of Alice Bailey, but it might be worth stating, for record, that in a great many cases, students of AAB are usually also students of HPB, or else have in interest in Theosophy as the Foundation of modern esotericism."
--> Have you seen this webpage? It discusses the relationship between Blavatsky's and Bailey's teachings.
Theosophy's Shadow: A Critical Look at the Claims and Teachings of Alice A. Bailey by Nicholas Weeks.
Andrew,
You said,
"I know that not every Theosophist is a student of Alice Bailey, but it might be worth stating, for record, that in a great many cases, students of AAB are usually also students of HPB, or else have in interest in Theosophy as the Foundation of modern esotericism."
--> Have you seen this webpage? It discusses the relationship between Blavatsky's and Bailey's teachings.
Theosophy's Shadow: A Critical Look at the Claims and Teachings of Alice A. Bailey by Nicholas Weeks.
Francis king
Well-Known Member
okay, then, I shall show u what I mean... shall I..?
u want to believe that the world and the solar system are a neat ordered place, but it isn't like that. It's why we have leap years, it's why the hindu's had either 9 or 13 moons in a year... Humans devise theories so they can try to fix a handle on things they have difficulty picking up... they do the same with lists, and diagrams, and HPB's fluffy verbiage is nothing different. These lists u cite are not facts, but just lists, possible explanations of how things might be...
so, my thoughts on ur lists...
as far as I know, the milky way doesn't have a guardian spirit, and nor does the sun... as u probably already know, nothing lives on the sun, as its a big ball of gas... same as in the rest of the milky way- no air, or summat, or so I hear...
a "mantavara" does not just one "guardian spirit", to my knowledge, but according to the manu-smrti, there are 14 progenitors and rulers of humankind, not seven, and there are TEN prajapatis, progenitors of the different races... so, that would make ten races, right? not seven, so, HPB got it wrong... or maybe I have... shucks...
and as for the kabbalah...
the sephira, or emanations, in the tree of life, are all supposedly aspects of Jehovah... the beauty of jehovah, the strength of jehovah, the understanding of jehovah, etc, etc... if u take Jehovah away from the kabbalah then the kabbalah is useless, unless of course ur an occultist and use it as a table of correspondences... these sephira are not angels, or archangels, but aspects of jehovah which, in a monotheistic religion like Judaism, suggest there is but the one God... I can back this up by saying that, well, originally, there were only seven archangels, all of which were created by Jehovah to do the bidding of Jehovah... even if we add jehovah as the top dog, we still have two empty seats on the kabbalah bus, but no doubt we can fill them with left over egyptian or hindu gods... why not, hey... so, take Jehovah away and there is nothing there but a pretty picture...
...reading the posts I see that ppl are banging on again about "bad karma" and how wrong it is to slate HPB and the theosophists, but again, as I have said in other posts, karma doesn't work like some counterweight of celestial justice, karma is more subtle than that... karma doesnt come from a punishing fat controller type God, u make ur own karma, karma is a mental factor, not a physical one, and yes, what u reap ye shall sow, but only becuase it ripens within ur own continuum...
brahma with four faces had five originally, and depending on who u believe one of his faces was cut off... regardless, the idea he had four faces was to suggest that he could see all angles, east, west, north, south, and was present everywhere...he wasn't a "guardian spirit", but supreme reality, much like Jehovah is for Jews... as u probably know, the earliest Gods in hinduism are- the prajapatis, (the earth's "fathers", if u like) then comes the soma (moon) and agni (fire), and then in comes Indra... It was only later on in hinduism that Brahma appeared as the supreme reality, and it not considered by the majority of hindu's as supreme reality today, unless ur a brahmin..lol..
theosophy may teach that there are seven heavens, and everyone but theosophists will only ever get to the sixth, but all religions come up with things like this, dont they- our way is the best way type stuff.. yes, u are free to believe what u like, and so am I, and I choose not to believe thats how it all plays out... regardless,
the second chart- evolution of a solar logos...
again, what a pretty chart... yet- only if ur a theosophist... completely useless to me... I know my place in the world, incidentally, and u have missed my place off the map... no big deal though... where do I live..? I dwell in reality... u take a left at Sirius Minor...
the third chart- the logos of a solar system- she's just ripped this off from the hindu's, again, and its all from the kalacakra, the great wheel of time, the yoga sutras of patanjali and little bits of tibetan tantra... interestingly enough, Max Muller was working on all this just before Blatvatsky was... strange that, hey...? all of this is, in my opinion, borrowed from a set of books called- the sacred wisdom of the east, and which runs to fifty volumes...again, all started by Max Muller... (Muller, Friedrich Max, 1823-1900)...
u may insult me and consider that I am a lesser being because I am not a theosophist, but shucks, like I care, really...
as for the theosophist's enherent nazi-ism...
alice bailey, in "esoteric psychology" volume 1, says... direct quote here, that ".... With the problem of the Jew I will come later.." pg 386... she also says on pg 387 that the sixth race will come from Brazil (isnt that were most of the nazi's went with the gold..?) and the motto for this ray is- I hide the seed... on pg 392 she says that "germany can give us the pattern of the superman, and this is its (the souls) ultimate destiny.."
the problems of the jews, explained by alice bailey run as follows...
the tendency of the jew is to manipulate forces and pull strings... the jew embodies in himself the world prodigal son... he is the victim of his God... He is the symbol of the disciple who has not yet learnt the lesson of a just sense of values. ... he has sinned willfully and with his eyes wide open to the results...
first printed in 1936, not 1875, and every successive reprint says the same thing...
yes, I have a problem with theosophy... my problem with theosophy is that it teaches it's students that they are better than everyone else and that blacks, jews, and even Indians, are not able to manage their own affairs because they are inferior to the aryans, even though, if u believe this stuff to be true, the aryans should in fact be all dead by now, if they were the third race... I appreciate that in the late 19th century racial superiority was a big deal, but to still publish the same books today without adding lil caveats or footnotes to suggest that things have changed is cruel... it is cruel because it allows these themes to be exploited by ppl who have less than pure motives, and it is cruel becuase it is an insidious and underhand attack on the ppl who's religious texts it has sublimated into the great cosmic soup that is theosophy...
so, lets cling to our lists, and kid ourselves we are superior to the rest of the world... let's pretend that we are kind hearted yet eccentric liberals when in reality, we are simply regurgitating a load of bunkum that wasn't all that hot 100 years ago, and let's forget that most of our theories do humanity a disservice while we pretend to serve them...
u want to believe that the world and the solar system are a neat ordered place, but it isn't like that. It's why we have leap years, it's why the hindu's had either 9 or 13 moons in a year... Humans devise theories so they can try to fix a handle on things they have difficulty picking up... they do the same with lists, and diagrams, and HPB's fluffy verbiage is nothing different. These lists u cite are not facts, but just lists, possible explanations of how things might be...
so, my thoughts on ur lists...
as far as I know, the milky way doesn't have a guardian spirit, and nor does the sun... as u probably already know, nothing lives on the sun, as its a big ball of gas... same as in the rest of the milky way- no air, or summat, or so I hear...
a "mantavara" does not just one "guardian spirit", to my knowledge, but according to the manu-smrti, there are 14 progenitors and rulers of humankind, not seven, and there are TEN prajapatis, progenitors of the different races... so, that would make ten races, right? not seven, so, HPB got it wrong... or maybe I have... shucks...
and as for the kabbalah...
the sephira, or emanations, in the tree of life, are all supposedly aspects of Jehovah... the beauty of jehovah, the strength of jehovah, the understanding of jehovah, etc, etc... if u take Jehovah away from the kabbalah then the kabbalah is useless, unless of course ur an occultist and use it as a table of correspondences... these sephira are not angels, or archangels, but aspects of jehovah which, in a monotheistic religion like Judaism, suggest there is but the one God... I can back this up by saying that, well, originally, there were only seven archangels, all of which were created by Jehovah to do the bidding of Jehovah... even if we add jehovah as the top dog, we still have two empty seats on the kabbalah bus, but no doubt we can fill them with left over egyptian or hindu gods... why not, hey... so, take Jehovah away and there is nothing there but a pretty picture...
...reading the posts I see that ppl are banging on again about "bad karma" and how wrong it is to slate HPB and the theosophists, but again, as I have said in other posts, karma doesn't work like some counterweight of celestial justice, karma is more subtle than that... karma doesnt come from a punishing fat controller type God, u make ur own karma, karma is a mental factor, not a physical one, and yes, what u reap ye shall sow, but only becuase it ripens within ur own continuum...
brahma with four faces had five originally, and depending on who u believe one of his faces was cut off... regardless, the idea he had four faces was to suggest that he could see all angles, east, west, north, south, and was present everywhere...he wasn't a "guardian spirit", but supreme reality, much like Jehovah is for Jews... as u probably know, the earliest Gods in hinduism are- the prajapatis, (the earth's "fathers", if u like) then comes the soma (moon) and agni (fire), and then in comes Indra... It was only later on in hinduism that Brahma appeared as the supreme reality, and it not considered by the majority of hindu's as supreme reality today, unless ur a brahmin..lol..
theosophy may teach that there are seven heavens, and everyone but theosophists will only ever get to the sixth, but all religions come up with things like this, dont they- our way is the best way type stuff.. yes, u are free to believe what u like, and so am I, and I choose not to believe thats how it all plays out... regardless,
the second chart- evolution of a solar logos...
again, what a pretty chart... yet- only if ur a theosophist... completely useless to me... I know my place in the world, incidentally, and u have missed my place off the map... no big deal though... where do I live..? I dwell in reality... u take a left at Sirius Minor...
the third chart- the logos of a solar system- she's just ripped this off from the hindu's, again, and its all from the kalacakra, the great wheel of time, the yoga sutras of patanjali and little bits of tibetan tantra... interestingly enough, Max Muller was working on all this just before Blatvatsky was... strange that, hey...? all of this is, in my opinion, borrowed from a set of books called- the sacred wisdom of the east, and which runs to fifty volumes...again, all started by Max Muller... (Muller, Friedrich Max, 1823-1900)...
u may insult me and consider that I am a lesser being because I am not a theosophist, but shucks, like I care, really...
as for the theosophist's enherent nazi-ism...
alice bailey, in "esoteric psychology" volume 1, says... direct quote here, that ".... With the problem of the Jew I will come later.." pg 386... she also says on pg 387 that the sixth race will come from Brazil (isnt that were most of the nazi's went with the gold..?) and the motto for this ray is- I hide the seed... on pg 392 she says that "germany can give us the pattern of the superman, and this is its (the souls) ultimate destiny.."
the problems of the jews, explained by alice bailey run as follows...
the tendency of the jew is to manipulate forces and pull strings... the jew embodies in himself the world prodigal son... he is the victim of his God... He is the symbol of the disciple who has not yet learnt the lesson of a just sense of values. ... he has sinned willfully and with his eyes wide open to the results...
first printed in 1936, not 1875, and every successive reprint says the same thing...
yes, I have a problem with theosophy... my problem with theosophy is that it teaches it's students that they are better than everyone else and that blacks, jews, and even Indians, are not able to manage their own affairs because they are inferior to the aryans, even though, if u believe this stuff to be true, the aryans should in fact be all dead by now, if they were the third race... I appreciate that in the late 19th century racial superiority was a big deal, but to still publish the same books today without adding lil caveats or footnotes to suggest that things have changed is cruel... it is cruel because it allows these themes to be exploited by ppl who have less than pure motives, and it is cruel becuase it is an insidious and underhand attack on the ppl who's religious texts it has sublimated into the great cosmic soup that is theosophy...
so, lets cling to our lists, and kid ourselves we are superior to the rest of the world... let's pretend that we are kind hearted yet eccentric liberals when in reality, we are simply regurgitating a load of bunkum that wasn't all that hot 100 years ago, and let's forget that most of our theories do humanity a disservice while we pretend to serve them...
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
I'll respond to a few parts of your post, Francis, the ones I have some understanding of ...
I also believe that to arrive alone, without the company of Friends on the Way, is no longer an option ...
I guess HPB couldn't invent any of that stuff, but she did help bring it together so that we could study it in terms of comparative religion(s), and the common foundation of all the world's Spiritual Traditions.
Jehovah, as per the essay by Rudolf Steiner, can be best understood, imho and as a student of the Ageless Wisdom - and not as someone writing from the perspective of the Hebrew, or Judeo-Christian Traditions - as a class of Creative Spirits ... rather than an individual, all-powerful `Deity.'
However, if we consider the Theosophical or Esoteric Hierarchy in terms that mesh well with the true Spirit (sic!) of these other traditions, then Jehovah, or YHWH may be equated with Sanat Kumara, the `Lord of the World,' also the `Ancient of Days.'
Perhaps it would be equally useful to say that Highest God in our own System, is THAT (`Being') who ensouls our own system, and has the physical Sun for `His' exoteric heart, while the `Heart of the Sun' ... is the true, Spiritual Sun of the Gayatri. You know, that ANCIENT Hindu Prayer?
Were the Jewish and earlier traditions (such as the Chaldean/Babylonian) without a corresponding Inspiriation? Certainly not. And would there not have been a Divine Relationship established, and existing, even since far more ancient times than anything we see recorded in the Bible? Save for the events related to us symbolically in Genesis, I'd say - of course.
Damn, that must be awful convenient! Go away, you don't fit into my "own continuum!"
And if I don't want to face any karmic results for slandering others, and showing general disrepect, then I don't have to worry - so long as I don't believe in that sort of thing.
Yikes! I don't think this is how Nick and I see it, for this is not what we've been taught about karma. And yes, I've even come to understand that sometimes karma is very physical.
Again, I can do not better than to quote HPB on karma-nemesis. Umm, Francis, this is starting to look really bad. Err, okay, look on the bright side: You have YET to show me something supposedly said by HPB, or taught, which we don't find is in fact, just the opposite - or precisely what you were, uh, kinda arguing against.
(cont'd)
Yes, I believe in a Divine Order ... and I believe that we are invited, even required (as part of our Dharma) to approach closer to the Heart, Mind, and Purpose of God. In more Eastern terms, Enlightenment, and Liberation, are our destiny ... and ours is the opportunity to work diligently toward this end.
I also believe that to arrive alone, without the company of Friends on the Way, is no longer an option ...
I think "as far as I know," is key here ... and from a strictly materialistic standpoint, I'd have to say you're right!Francis king said:
The 14 "progenitors" are spoken of, in Theosophical terms, as Root and Seed Manus. I will quote from HPB's teachings, via this online source, which also references The Laws of Manu:Francis king said:
Root-manu and Seed-manu Fourteen manus preside over our planetary chain during its life-cycle, there being two principal or round-manus for each round. The first of each pair, appearing at the beginning of a round, is called the root-manu; the second, appearing towards the end, before the intervening twilight or nirvana, is the seed-manu, who presides over the holding of the seeds of life until the coming of the life-waves at the beginning of the next round. The root-manu appears on globe A, the seed-manu on the seventh globe (globe G).
Root- and seed-manu, in certain relations, are spoken of as being respectively the prime cause and its accumulated final effect at the end of the round. As we are now in the middle of the fourth round, there have so far been seven principal or round-manus. By reason of nature's analogical procedures, there is for each globe of a planetary chain a root-manu at the beginning of its several succeeding periods of activity, and a seed-manu at the end of the same; as being their spiritual offspring, the names are the same as those by which the principal or round-manus are known. This list of root- and seed-manus for each round is given in The Laws of Manu (cf SD 2:309): 1) Svayambhuva, Svarochi or Svarochisha; 2) Auttami, Tamasa; 3) Raivata, Chakshusha; 4) Vaivasvata (our progenitor), Savarna; 5) Daksha-savarna, Brahma-savarna; 6) Dharma-savarna, Rudra-savarna; and 7) Rauchya, Bhautya.
Vaivasvata is the primitive root-manu of our fourth human wave. Manu, insofar as the human life-wave is concerned, is not a man but collective humanity; yet it is likewise true that Manu is a spiritual individual -- a difficult doctrine to grasp at first presentation. The name Vaivasvata is also used for one of the seven minor manus who preside over the seven root-races of our planet. It is this latter that among other peoples is called Xisuthrus, Deucalion, Noah, etc. See also MANU
So, Francis ... I think that speaks quite directly to the 14 manus - now a word about the TEN Prajapatis (same source):Prajapatis (Sanskrit) [from praja that which is brought forth from pra forth + the verbal root jan to be born + pati lord] The producers, evolvers, or givers of life to all on the earth's planetary chain, and hence lords of offspring in the hierarchical sense. Prajapatis is likewise applicable mutatis mutandis to larger hierarchical divisions, such as a solar system or galaxy. The prajapatis
I've highlighted the direct references to TEN Prajapatis in blue... and other salient points in red. Note that the source for these references include both the Kabbalistic SEPHIROTH, as well as the MAHABHARATA ... as also the Mazdean Wisdom of Persia."are, like the Sephiroth, only seven, including the synthetic Sephira of the triad from which they spring. Thus from Hiranyagarbha or Prajapati, the triune (primeval Vedic Trimurti, Agni, Vayu, and Surya), emanate the other seven, or again ten, if we separate the first three which exist in one . . . In the Mahabharata the Prajapati are 21 in number, or ten, six, and five (1065), thrice seven" (SD 1:89-90).
These seven, ten, or more prajapatis correspond likewise to the Mazdean Amesha-Spentas or Amshaspends and the Hindu Saptarshis. The name prajapati is most commonly given to ten rishis or sages known as the mind-born sons of Brahma: Marichi, Atri, Angiras, Pulastya, Pulaha, Kratu, Vasishtha, Prachetas or Daksha, Bhrigu, and Narada. These are really collective names for the various classes of monads, each single prajapati representing also the spiritual-intellectual hierarch of his own particular hierarchy or class of monads. Hence the meaning of prajapati as lord or parent of offspring -- the ten classes of monads corresponding each to its own proper prajapati. Further the prajapatis are the parents of the seven or ten manus. The Puranic myths with their genealogies of the seven prajapatis, rishis, or manus are "but a vast detailed account of the progressive development and evolution of animal creation, one species after the other" (SD 2:253)."The whole personnel of the Brahmanas and Puranas -- the Rishis, Prajapatis, Manus, their wives and progeny -- belong to that pre-human period. All these are the Seed of Humanity, so to speak. It is around these 'Sons of God,' the 'Mind born' astral children of Brahma, that our physical frames have grown and developed to what they are now. For, the Puranic histories of all those men are those of our Monads, in their various and numberless incarnations on this and other spheres, events perceived by the 'Siva eye' of the ancient Seers, (the 'third eye' of our Stanzas) and described allegorically. Later on, they were disfigured for Sectarian purposes; mutilated, but still left with a considerable ground-work of truth in them. Nor is the philosophy less profound in such allegories for being so thickly veiled by the overgrowth of fancy" (SD 2:284)
I guess HPB couldn't invent any of that stuff, but she did help bring it together so that we could study it in terms of comparative religion(s), and the common foundation of all the world's Spiritual Traditions.
There is the Jehovah, associated with the Planet Saturn (its Regent, an Archangel ... or Prajapati, a Spirit before the Throne).Francis king said:
Jehovah, as per the essay by Rudolf Steiner, can be best understood, imho and as a student of the Ageless Wisdom - and not as someone writing from the perspective of the Hebrew, or Judeo-Christian Traditions - as a class of Creative Spirits ... rather than an individual, all-powerful `Deity.'
However, if we consider the Theosophical or Esoteric Hierarchy in terms that mesh well with the true Spirit (sic!) of these other traditions, then Jehovah, or YHWH may be equated with Sanat Kumara, the `Lord of the World,' also the `Ancient of Days.'
Perhaps it would be equally useful to say that Highest God in our own System, is THAT (`Being') who ensouls our own system, and has the physical Sun for `His' exoteric heart, while the `Heart of the Sun' ... is the true, Spiritual Sun of the Gayatri. You know, that ANCIENT Hindu Prayer?
Were the Jewish and earlier traditions (such as the Chaldean/Babylonian) without a corresponding Inspiriation? Certainly not. And would there not have been a Divine Relationship established, and existing, even since far more ancient times than anything we see recorded in the Bible? Save for the events related to us symbolically in Genesis, I'd say - of course.
That's an interesting idea. Then how do `I relate to you," in terms of karma? I can say or do anything I like, since after all, the only person I'm really accountable to is myself?Francis king said:
Damn, that must be awful convenient! Go away, you don't fit into my "own continuum!"
And if I don't want to face any karmic results for slandering others, and showing general disrepect, then I don't have to worry - so long as I don't believe in that sort of thing.
Yikes! I don't think this is how Nick and I see it, for this is not what we've been taught about karma. And yes, I've even come to understand that sometimes karma is very physical.
Again, I can do not better than to quote HPB on karma-nemesis. Umm, Francis, this is starting to look really bad. Err, okay, look on the bright side: You have YET to show me something supposedly said by HPB, or taught, which we don't find is in fact, just the opposite - or precisely what you were, uh, kinda arguing against.
"An Occultist or a philosopher will not speak of the goodness or cruelty of Providence; but, identifying it with Karma-Nemesis, he will teach that nevertheless it guards the good and watches over them in this, as in future lives; and that it punishes the evil-doer -- aye, even to his seventh rebirth. So long, in short, as the effect of his having thrown into perturbation even the smallest atom in the Infinite World of harmony, has not been finally readjusted. For the only decree of Karma -- an eternal and immutable decree -- is absolute Harmony in the world of matter as it is in the world of Spirit. It is not, therefore, Karma that rewards or punishes, but it is we, who reward or punish ourselves according to whether we work with, through and along with nature, abiding by the laws on which that Harmony depends, or -- break them.
"Nor would the ways of Karma be inscrutable were men to work in union and harmony, instead of disunion and strife. For our ignorance of those ways -- which one portion of mankind calls the ways of Providence, dark and intricate; while another sees in them the action of blind Fatalism; and a third, simple chance, with neither gods nor devils to guide them -- would surely disappear, if we would but attribute all these to their correct cause. With right knowledge, or at any rate with a confident conviction that our neighbours will no more work to hurt us than we would think of harming them, the two-thirds of the World's evil would vanish into thin air. Were no man to hurt his brother, Karma-Nemesis would have neither cause to work for, nor weapons to act through. . . . We stand bewildered before the mystery of our own making, and the riddles of life that we will not solve, and then accuse the great Sphinx of devouring us. But verily there is not an accident in our lives, not a misshapen day, or a misfortune, that could not be traced back to our own doings in this or in another life" (SD 1:643-4).
Again, I highlighted in blue the most pertinent statement, for other than this, you and HPB have made a common point. The angry, wrathful, tribal deity, looking after "the chosen people," is but a dark page in Humanity's past archive of misunderstandings. Would that there were not karma involved with such a travesty! Here's Avalokita-Ishvara, or `the Lord Who is seen':Francis king said:
The five sets of faces has a signficance that I'm really not qualified to say much about. The Five Dhyani Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, though, exoterically, number Seven, esoterically ... this much we're plainly told. Humanity has developed through FIVE Root Races, with two left to come. Or, in terms of the Seven, the first two (in their entirety) were non-physical, thus leaving no physical vestiges. This would especially make it difficult to provide "fossilized evidence," wouldn't it?
Of course, this all assumes we believe in non-physical worlds, else I'm just whistlin' Dixie!
(cont'd)
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
I think this is poppycock! Has everything to do with how we've lived our lives. Religion is really quite a tangent here, imho.Francis king said:
On a trip there I once saw a crater in the sun - no wait, that was Cirrus Minor, nevermind ....Francis king said:
Okay, I've heard of the set. There's another, `Life and Teachings of the Masters of the Far East,' by Baird Spalding (?). I intend to check it out, have no real clue about it, nor have I read Muller's set.Francis king said:
Once again, poppycock!Francis king said:
Not so. We can look at specific teachings on the Jewish race elsewhere, but I'm going to recommend to Nick that he and I start a thread specifically on the Theosophical and esoteric presentation of Root Races, so we can manage our topics better. In short, again in my humble opinion, what you're asserted is crap, because this is not what is taught. If that's how it strikes you, then that is important ... and it bears discussion. This is not what the Teachings are intended to indicate.Francis king said:
Well, the Aryans aren't dead. They're us.Francis king said:
Again, we need a different thread. The Third Race was Lemurian, which was not even physical (!) until ~18 million years ago. With the concretization of the form, came the division of the sexes, all this precipitated by the arrival upon our planet of the Kumaras from Venusian Humanity.
The Atlantean RR was the 4th, although most people today are still Atlantean in their consciousness, while the material evolution has brought us up to the point of the 5th RR in time - signs of the 6th sub-race being clear in some parts of the world.
I think you've made an extremely important, and obviously valid point here! And I know that there are many writers who are seeking to present teachings whose source, or sources, are not racist, or bigoted ... in a light that will better reflect this fact to people today.Francis king said:
Even a few decades makes a tremendous difference. So when you are writing about the Jews, and reminding us that this was in the 1920s through 1940s ... try to also keep in mind that the World War(s) had not yet been won during much of this time, and even when it had, we didn't even KNOW what "Civil Rights" was!!!
We knew enough about love, and Brotherhood, that I would ASK you to read, our oft-cited `Maha Chohan's Letter' ... and consider the rather progressive view that he suggests.
You have some potentially valid points here. I don't think you really have any interest in discussing them though. If you do, just let me know.Francis king said:
Peace, and Namaskar,
~andrew
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
i'd like to hear how this stuff about jews is actually understood nowadays, myself. i've already seen how complete ignorance around our texts is seen as the norm.
b'shalom
bananabrain
b'shalom
bananabrain
Dondi
Well-Known Member
AndrewX said:
And where do you fit in all this, Andrew? Are you racist or bigoted?
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
Hi everybody,
I am a little surprised to hear that Theosophy is called racist, so I thought I would respond.
It has been said there is only one dogma in Theosophy, and that dogma is brotherhood. Brotherhood is the first rule of Theosophy, a new member only has the requirement of agreeing to have full brotherhood with people of all races, and brotherhood is the one teaching from which all other Theosophical teachings come. (Is there any other philosophy like Theosophy in the world that requires white people to accept black people as equals?)
Racism does not make sense in Theosophy, because, according to Theosophy, all white Theosophists have been born in black bodies before, and there is a chance that white Theosophists will again be born into black bodies. For this reason, racism does not make sense. It is the senselessness of racism that causes Theosophy to discard it.
I can verify there is not a smidgin of racsim in any of the Theosophical meetings I have attended. As a matter of fact, at last year's convention, the best speaker was a black man, and everyone was very appreciative of his expertise. Such is the proof that racism is forbidden in Theosophy.
I am a little surprised to hear that Theosophy is called racist, so I thought I would respond.
It has been said there is only one dogma in Theosophy, and that dogma is brotherhood. Brotherhood is the first rule of Theosophy, a new member only has the requirement of agreeing to have full brotherhood with people of all races, and brotherhood is the one teaching from which all other Theosophical teachings come. (Is there any other philosophy like Theosophy in the world that requires white people to accept black people as equals?)
Racism does not make sense in Theosophy, because, according to Theosophy, all white Theosophists have been born in black bodies before, and there is a chance that white Theosophists will again be born into black bodies. For this reason, racism does not make sense. It is the senselessness of racism that causes Theosophy to discard it.
I can verify there is not a smidgin of racsim in any of the Theosophical meetings I have attended. As a matter of fact, at last year's convention, the best speaker was a black man, and everyone was very appreciative of his expertise. Such is the proof that racism is forbidden in Theosophy.
Interesting take on brotherhood ... from every post so far, you seem to declare a 'brotherhood' with Judaism as long as the Jews realise they got their doctrine all wrong, and you declare 'brotherhood' with Christians as long as we realise our sacred texts have been fabricated and falsified (let alone the vilification laid at the door of the Roman Catholic Church, blamed for things that happened centuries before it existed as an institution) ... and presumably you declare 'brotherhood' with every other tradition as long as they accept that your interpretation of their scripture is the only one that counts ...
From where I stand, I read 'Big Brother-hood'?
I, for my part, delight in every spiritual tradition, even though it is different from my own, and would never presume to inform people that the Koran, or the Vedas, or the Pali Canon, or whatever, have been falsified, fabricated, faked, etc.
Unity in diversity ... not a unity in tyranny.
Thomas
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
"...they got their doctrine all wrong..."
--> Ah, Thomas, you are ever so quick with your negative over-generalizations. It is a shame you are not interested in a discussion on specific similarities between the Sephiroth, Hinduism, and Buddhism (especially since all three came from the same source). You may continue to say I condemn all Jewish doctrine, if you wish.
It is the mission of Theosophy to call a specific mistake a specific mistake. The very motto of Theosophy is, "There is no religion higher than truth."
"...tyranny..."
--> At lease you did not insinuate that Theosophy is nothing but a pack of lies, like you did the time before. Things are getting better!
I have not condemned all of Christianity and Judiasm as you have declared, I have pointed out specific mistakes. If I had made such a wide-sweeping condemnation, you would have been in the right to say what you said. As it is, it is only a smear campaign that attempts to stifle a free discussion of specific religious concepts.
Your philosophy allows you to make such sweeping negative over-generalizations. Mine does not. Now, perhaps, you can see part of why I choose mine over yours.
You may continue to describe Theosophy as tyranny (that actually makes me chuckle) if you wish. In response, I choose to quote the Golden Stairs one more time.
"A clean life, an open mind, a pure heart, an eager intellect, an unveiled spiritual perception, a brotherliness for one’s co-disciple, a readiness to give and receive advice and instruction; a loyal sense of duty to the Teacher, a willing obedience to the behests of Truth, once we have placed our confidence in and believe that Teacher to be in possession of it; a courageous endurance of personal injustice, a brave declaration of principles, a valiant defence of those who are unjustly attacked, and a constant eye to the ideal of human progression and perfection which the Secret Science depicts -- these are the golden stairs up the steps of which the learner may climb to the Temple of Divine Wisdom."
- H. P. Blavatsky
I await your next negative over-generalization. (It may give me a chance to discuss another specific Theosophical concept. Cool beans!)
"...they got their doctrine all wrong..."
--> Ah, Thomas, you are ever so quick with your negative over-generalizations. It is a shame you are not interested in a discussion on specific similarities between the Sephiroth, Hinduism, and Buddhism (especially since all three came from the same source). You may continue to say I condemn all Jewish doctrine, if you wish.
It is the mission of Theosophy to call a specific mistake a specific mistake. The very motto of Theosophy is, "There is no religion higher than truth."
"...tyranny..."
--> At lease you did not insinuate that Theosophy is nothing but a pack of lies, like you did the time before. Things are getting better!
I have not condemned all of Christianity and Judiasm as you have declared, I have pointed out specific mistakes. If I had made such a wide-sweeping condemnation, you would have been in the right to say what you said. As it is, it is only a smear campaign that attempts to stifle a free discussion of specific religious concepts.
Your philosophy allows you to make such sweeping negative over-generalizations. Mine does not. Now, perhaps, you can see part of why I choose mine over yours.
You may continue to describe Theosophy as tyranny (that actually makes me chuckle) if you wish. In response, I choose to quote the Golden Stairs one more time.
"A clean life, an open mind, a pure heart, an eager intellect, an unveiled spiritual perception, a brotherliness for one’s co-disciple, a readiness to give and receive advice and instruction; a loyal sense of duty to the Teacher, a willing obedience to the behests of Truth, once we have placed our confidence in and believe that Teacher to be in possession of it; a courageous endurance of personal injustice, a brave declaration of principles, a valiant defence of those who are unjustly attacked, and a constant eye to the ideal of human progression and perfection which the Secret Science depicts -- these are the golden stairs up the steps of which the learner may climb to the Temple of Divine Wisdom."
- H. P. Blavatsky
I await your next negative over-generalization. (It may give me a chance to discuss another specific Theosophical concept. Cool beans!)
I have to admit a lot of this theology seems to me like an overly-complicated reality map, and an oversimplification of earlier traditions to fit the pattern. But I don't think it's any more odd than any other belief system, just less known. There are a lot of relatively more recent myths that have been created and embraced, like a lot of the New Agey stuff, that I think in time, as long as it doesn't fade out, will just become another thing people believe.
Maybe one of the things that makes theosophy harder to accept is that mostly we don't really view the world mythically anymore. When something comes from our ancestors we can say, "Oh yeah. That's how they expressed things." or, "Things like that really happened back then." But when it's in our own time all we can manage to say is, "What? Well that's not rational. We're rational thinkers now. No room for myth-making."
I also don't really see what the problem is if an older text has some racist language. We see that a lot in religion. There's a lot of xenophobia, a lot of triumphalism. So long as that's not current belief, why's it matter? If something's become somewhat canonical it's not like the members of a faith are likely to go back and rewrite it.
Dauer
Maybe one of the things that makes theosophy harder to accept is that mostly we don't really view the world mythically anymore. When something comes from our ancestors we can say, "Oh yeah. That's how they expressed things." or, "Things like that really happened back then." But when it's in our own time all we can manage to say is, "What? Well that's not rational. We're rational thinkers now. No room for myth-making."
I also don't really see what the problem is if an older text has some racist language. We see that a lot in religion. There's a lot of xenophobia, a lot of triumphalism. So long as that's not current belief, why's it matter? If something's become somewhat canonical it's not like the members of a faith are likely to go back and rewrite it.
Dauer
Nick the Pilot
Well-Known Member
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Dauer,
You said,
"...a lot of this theology [Theosophy?] seems to me like an overly-complicated reality map...."
--> Theosophy is, by far, the most complicated philosophy I have ever seen. (The bits and pieces I post on this Forum are only the tip of the iceberg.)
"...just less known."
--> Theosophy in its present form is only a little over 100 years old.
"Maybe one of the things that makes theosophy harder to accept is that mostly we don't really view the world mythically anymore."
--> You remind me of something I just read on the Buddhist Forum, how one fellow wants to ignore all of the mythology in Buddhism and only concentrate on things like doing meditation, etc. Actually, there is room for such thinking in Theosophy. No one is forced to accept any part of Theosophy, and people can pick and choose what they like. There are visitors to Theosophy who only like one small part of Theosophy, and other Theosophists cannot force another part of Theosophy on them. Forcing doctrine on anyone is forbidden. For example, if a person takes a look at Theosophy and says from the beginning they reject outright the idea of reincarnation, we do not have a problem with that. Theosophy does not allow any dogma -- with one exception.
"We're rational thinkers now. No room for myth-making."
--> Theosophy demands rational thinking from its members. Any beliefs in ancient myths are entertained only after they make sense to us.
"I also don't really see what the problem is if an older text has some racist language. We see that a lot in religion."
--> I appreciate your open-mindedness. It is quite refreshing to hear such open-mindedness.
"There's a lot of xenophobia, a lot of triumphalism."
--> Theosophy was established for the very purpose of eliminating xenophobia and triumphalism. This is the basis from which brotherhood is created.
"So long as that's not current belief, why's it matter?"
--> I appreciate your religious pluralism.
Dauer,
You said,
"...a lot of this theology [Theosophy?] seems to me like an overly-complicated reality map...."
--> Theosophy is, by far, the most complicated philosophy I have ever seen. (The bits and pieces I post on this Forum are only the tip of the iceberg.)
"...just less known."
--> Theosophy in its present form is only a little over 100 years old.
"Maybe one of the things that makes theosophy harder to accept is that mostly we don't really view the world mythically anymore."
--> You remind me of something I just read on the Buddhist Forum, how one fellow wants to ignore all of the mythology in Buddhism and only concentrate on things like doing meditation, etc. Actually, there is room for such thinking in Theosophy. No one is forced to accept any part of Theosophy, and people can pick and choose what they like. There are visitors to Theosophy who only like one small part of Theosophy, and other Theosophists cannot force another part of Theosophy on them. Forcing doctrine on anyone is forbidden. For example, if a person takes a look at Theosophy and says from the beginning they reject outright the idea of reincarnation, we do not have a problem with that. Theosophy does not allow any dogma -- with one exception.
"We're rational thinkers now. No room for myth-making."
--> Theosophy demands rational thinking from its members. Any beliefs in ancient myths are entertained only after they make sense to us.
"I also don't really see what the problem is if an older text has some racist language. We see that a lot in religion."
--> I appreciate your open-mindedness. It is quite refreshing to hear such open-mindedness.
"There's a lot of xenophobia, a lot of triumphalism."
--> Theosophy was established for the very purpose of eliminating xenophobia and triumphalism. This is the basis from which brotherhood is created.
"So long as that's not current belief, why's it matter?"
--> I appreciate your religious pluralism.