Theos-Talk Archives (February 1995 Message tl00029)

I feel like I should write a retraction of sorts for my rambling
thoughts driven by feelings that were largely unprocessed.  There
seems to be a need for me to make theosophy into something it
isn't.  Others are quite comfortable with theosophy exactly as it
is.  I think theosophy is "ancient wisdom" (or its study) that is
somehow always relevent through all manifested time and space.
The T.S.  is largely a modern guardian of this "ancient wisdom"
as it has been handed down, but more specifically a guardian of
the teachings and writings of modern theosphists from Blavatsky
on.  (I could be wrong about this for sure).  Theosophy is not
meant to be all things to all people and indeed, whoever said it
was? The three objects spell out and perhaps justifiably limit
the scope and purpose of theosophy (which is pretty ambitious).

I would like to include art and psychology into theosophy, but
maybe they don't really fit.  Maybe they were left out with good
cause.  Feeling issues tend to be expresssed and processed more
in art and in psychological practice (therapy) than in theosophy
which deals more with thinking issues.

Also my comparison of Unity Church with theosophical study
centers or lodges was unfair since a lodge is not a church and is
not meant to compete with churches (IMHO).  Also the people in
our lodge and most I have come into contact with in theosophy
have been unusually developed, friendly, concerned and
compassionate individuals (IMHO).  I was projecting a lot of
frustrated feelings and needs on to things outside.

So what good are feelings? Without feelings, instincts and
attachments we would probaly not bother to live or study
theosophy, although the goal seems to be to gid rid of them?
Feelings, some might say, come largely from the astral plane and
therfore are ipso facto to be mistrusted.  How can you tell a
feeling (astral) from a high intution (buddhic) or a necessity
(atmic)? There seems a common theme in many related posts
recently that everything relates to its own level that is math to
math, but not math to spirituality, in the sense that the
uncertainty principle says nothing to us about universal laws on
other levels or about Eastern mysticism.

Can we be sure or is the hope for something that unifies all the
levels only an impossible dream? Stephen Hawkings would say he
and others are on the verge of some mathematical expression of
"the mind of God" and Blavatsky claimed that the "Secret
Doctrine" is the synthesis of philosophy, science and religion.

The grand picture seems to be one of Spirit tearning itself down
(falling) and enfolding itself in matter (itself again) so as to
build itself back up (evolution or even a kind of salvation?) so
as to become conscious and conscious of itself.  Whew! And then
to return to the Unconscious/Unmanifest and do it all again.

       Nothing Gold Can Stay

Nature's first green is gold
Her hardest hue to hold
Her early leaf's a flower
But only so an hour.

Then leaf subsides to leaf
So Eden sank to grief
So dawn goes down to day
Nothing gold can stay.

       -- Robert Frost

Namaste
Keith Price