means of helping others
Oct 11, 1993 03:36 PM
Everything in life has both costs and benefits to it. The pros and cons
need to be weight by an individual. This is true of considering
the acquisition of psychic facilities or anything else that one may
Buddhists would say that the cause of suffering is the failure to
realize the impermanence of life. The suffering comes from an
attachment to what one expects or wants to happen in life rather than
letting oneself follow the flow of life.
The realization of compassion grows from a sense of indifference to
others, to a understanding that hurting another will eventually come
back to hurt oneself, to a genuine sympathy and caring for the state
of the other, to a recognization of the *same life* in the other, to
a realization that the very fabric of one's life is composed of the
connectedness with everything else. (We are not, in the ultimate
analysis, separate but related beings; we are rather a conscious web
of connections with everything and everyone else.)
Extra information that can be gathered from seeing auras represents
additional input of the senses of indications of what is going on
in other people. You see someone physically smile. You see a certain
color in their aura. Both are sensory inputs. Both are different from
being directly attuned with the consciousness in the others.
For scientific investigation, we are able to extend the reach of
the physical senses to know much that we cannot see, hear, taste,
touch. The power of the mind, comtined with an existing body of
knowledge, combined with instruments that reveal certain facts, all
are used to extend our knowledge of the physical world.
We are likewise able to extend our knowledge of what is going on in
people using various external indicators. These are not a substitute
for *knowing* the people themselves, but help when we are otherwise
stuck ... Palmistry, the tarot, astrology, the colors we see in auras,
the toss of the I Ching, ... these are all external indicators that
provide clues to what is going on. They do not represent direct
knowledge. The direct knowledge comes from buddhi-manas, in its
function of direct knowing, in its function of knowing because one is
related to the other in one's being, the function of experiencing
oneself as the other person.
I'm not opposed to the discussion of psychic phenomena and how various
faculties are developed in this group. Appropriate warnings, though,
need to be given. As to the role they play in the lives of any of us,
it is an individual choice. As to their place in the big picture, we
can talk in more general terms about what we have learned from the
theosophical teachings without having to decide on individual cases
and the particular circumstances of any individual. There are always
exceptions to any general rule ...
I believe that we all agree on the need for helping out the world,
on manifesting compassion for the suffering of mankind. Our concern
is the same, even when we may differ on what are the best means of
helping others. The best means are those we have at hand, to use what
we have and we will be given increasing capibilities of helping others.
Whatever we use will grow in power and strength and become an
integral part of ourselves, so we benefit from our service. My
preference is for means that emphasize selflessness, the impersonal,
the highest faculties within, qualities that I both want to acquire
and want to share with others.
Regardless of the means chosen, anything done for the good of
humanity is appreciated since we are all working for the same goal.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application