Theos-Talk Archives (September 1994 Message tl00036)

This is by Eldon Tucker

----

There is quite a lot going on. It's almost impossible to keep
up with all that is being written about on 'theos-l'. Here are
a few stray comments.

----

Frank Dyer:

    Over the years, I've had a chance to talk with a number
of G. de Purucker's students. I've also had a chance to see
some private archival materials on his life. I have to say,
frankly, that I don't recall a lot of detail of what I've come
across. My appreciation of Purucker is not, though, due to
what anyone has said of him, nor of any historic documents I
may have seen. I value him for his role as Teacher, in helping
me approach Theosophy. You might ask: How could I consider him
as a Teacher when I never met him in person? I'd say: Because
his writings, and the results of his life, led me to the
Teachings, and I feel that I own him a great debt.

    Regarding psychology, I'd consider it the "physiology" of
the personality, with a different sort of creature in each
culture, each subrace.

    As to unselfishness, to describe it as action with no
trace of personal desire may be misleading. This idea seems to
come from the approach that would reduce the personality to a
cipher in order to attain the spiritual. That may be the wrong
way. I'd consider the active flowering of the personality to
continue with the growth of spirituality, not to wither away.
It is the sense of being centered in the personality, the
*focusing* of the seat of consciousness in the personality,
that is the problem. Personal desire is an element of the
activity of the personality, be it for good or bad. The change
with growing spirituality is that the personality is no longer
center-stage; it is no longer the prime motivator; it no
longer is that part of us that we identify with as being
ourselves. But it still exists, as a part of our constitution,
and is used to give expression to the life within.

----

Nancy:

    It's nice to see a word or two from you, to know that
you're still around. I assume that because of your busy
activity in prison work, you have no time to write much
yourself. How about sharing (with permission, if required)
some of the gems of what you've written in your prison work?

    With the exception of Gerald Schueler, I don't see lots
of postings of Pasadena T.S. members. I hope there isn't some
restriction about publicly writing about Theosophy, some
requirement that you not present in a public forum the deeper
Teachings.

----

Lewis:

    I agree that it is not necessarily an ego trip to seek
the good, to better ourselves, when certainly we are rewarded
for the effort. Even if our motivations at first are impure,
mixed, somewhat selfish, as we spiritualize ourselves, we make
it easier to operate from higher motivations.

    Regarding the burden of karma, it is only seen as a
burden when viewed as *exterior to ourselves.* When we see
that we are not separate from our relationships with others,
and that those relationships are the very definition of karmic
connections with them, then the sense of *burden* falls away.
What we feel is what we've made ourselves into, and we cannot
help in changing those close to us, those we are connected to
in life, when we change ourselves. All life is interconnected,
and those connections are our bonds of karma. But "bonds" is
a misleading term, since we are not tied to something. It is
more like a vast web of life, a karmic web, which by our day-
to-day activities we continue to weave the fabric of manifest
life.

----

Bill:

    I don't think that it was right, when you asked a
theosophical question, for someone to simply tell you to "read
The Secret Doctrine." That is an evasive answer, that shows
the person unready or unable to explain in clear language an
answer to your question. Something can always be said,
something appropriate to the type of question you may ask.

    The question of seven or five "bodies" is misleading,
when applied to the principles of consciousness. The
principles are not "bodies," but rather aspects or facets of
consciousness itself. Breaking apart the white light of
consciousness, we find the spectrum of colors that are the
principles. Wherever we exist, as fully conscious and fully
manifest beings, we have all seven (or ten or twelve)
principles. This could be on any plane, globe, or planetary
chain--anywhere that we can come into existence.

    Regarding group karma, we may need to describe who or
what a group is, before we can say that it is an entity
capable of having karma of its own. A loose definition of
group karma might be a collective *influence.* Some great
being may project a ray of consciousness, the effects of which
are felt by a group of people. These people have this
influence in common, and because of it are members of a group.
The karma they share with each other and with the group's
originator would be "group karma." These people, though,
participate in the group; they are not caused by it. Their
participation is by choice, by allowing themselves to come
under that particular ray of consciousness. That relationship
is self-chosen, originated at some point in the past, and will
someday end; it is not eternal.

----

Gerald Schueler:

    You're right about the need for humility. Humility,
though, does not arise by focusing in the personality, and
choosing to do things that humble oneself. It is not from some
artificial act of personal piety. Rather, humility comes from
forgetting oneself, from no longer giving an excessive sense
of importance to one's personality, from putting the higher
truths and things of beauty before petty interests, and having
a genuine concern for the needs of others *on an equal and
unbiased basis with one's own needs.* The sense of personal
pride is no longer an obstacle to living life; a wounded ego
loses its power to motivate action; the love of the True and
the Beautiful replace one's personal needs as the most
interesting subjects of our attention. True humility comes
comes from taking the power from the personal sense of
importance, from ego gratification, and turning it over to
a practical love of the Highest in life.

    In psychological terms, the shadow is the personal
energies that are unable to be directly lived out in the
personal self. Because of being a particular person with
certain interests, certain qualities, of a certain moral
character, we can live out certain parts of ourself, and deny,
ignore, or suppress other parts of ourselves. These other
parts of ourselves, as they complement and oppose our official
personality, can be treated as a inner psychological rival,
the shadow. But the shadow is not a being in its own right,
and it is not to be lived out by direct actions. Its energies
are tapped and given expression in symbolic acts; where it to
be lived out in more literal fashion we would quickly come to
a breakdown of the personality with all sorts of attendant
problems. What is it in theosophical terms? It is the lower
part of the unlived out life energies, which once set in
motion, need to be dealt with in some manner or another. If we
can deal with these energies while still alive, we are
shortening our kamaloka. We cannot avoid dealing with them; if
not in life, then in the after-death we must face and come to
grips with our darker, unfulfilled energies. The same is also
true of the higher energies, normally finding their fruition
in devachan. These higher energies could be worked out, in
part, while we are still alive, if we can do something to give
them expression, either directly or through symbolic or
magical acts.

----

Richard Ihle

    One aspect of genius is a prolific output, never looking
back, but always going forward with ever-better creations,
ever-better contributions to the beauty, intelligence, and
happiness of the world. We can never go back and reclaim what
we have done, any more than we can undo karma, once made. But
we can engender new causes, that have equal power in
fashioning the future. As long as you continue to do your best
to bring light to the minds of men, you cannot go wrong.
Discretion may be necessary at times--some things must be
spoken of with care, if shared at all. But we are bound to
share, to express in the world, the grand truths that we
behold, or risk facing inner death. Our inner nature will only
awaken to those truths, those beauties, those grand visions of
life that we willingly live out or share with others. It is as
thought we provide a circuit, in our lives, for the higher
energies to flow into the outer world. Unblocked and free-
flowing, we express more, and are thereby entitled to behold
even more. When we shut our mouths, and start to keep to
ourselves what we have found, we start to lose it; it spoils
and goes sour on us; we die inwardly. Don't be shy about
moving forward, and sharing the Philosophy, with due
discretion and discrimination, of course, in the manner of
expression.