Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00129)

Art:<In order to avoid utter chaos a movement determines
what writings will consolidate the experience for the
continuing group. This is called the "canon" and is like a
yard stick of spiritual experience. Both leadership and
the group itself works together to decide what is
authoritative for themselves>

This is exactly what I said in an earlier posting,
Art. We can all sit back and say that there is no dogma or
doctrine, no "core teachings" per se, but it simply is not
so. Without some kind of core teachings, we would have
chaos. We wouldn't be able to discuss theosophy, because
we have to define something before we can discuss it
intelligently. If nothing else, the core teachings are
those that we each believe to be true, and thus they can
vary with each member, but again this will lead to a great
deal of confusion. There is nothing at all wrong with
divided things up into exoteric (in words - the mind or
head) and esoteric (without words - the heart, or gnosis
directly perceived), and I like the idea of requiring only
a belief in universal brotherhood for TS membership, but I
simply have to belive that core teachings such as karma,
reincarnation, and cycles, are what theosophy is all about
and what separates theosophy from everything else (Eldon,
for example, is always quick to point out that theosophy is
different from Buddhism (and I agree) - but how can this be
if theosophy has no core teachings, which Buddhism
certainly does have?).

Eldon: < The psychology of the common man does not
particularly apply to those who would go beyond the current
evolution of humanity, and seek to hasten their spiritual
evolution.>

I certainly agree with you on this one, Eldon.

Art:< Inflation happens when the boundaries collapse and
the differentiation of consciousness between an
archetypal entity and a human being are not acknowledged.>

This brings up a very interesting point, that I
am familiar with under the banner of magic, but not as a
part of theosophy. In magic, the magican deliberately
inflates his/her sense of identity to that of a deity
via invocation. The Egyptian Book of the Dead, for
example, is full of such lines as "I am the god Tem"
and so on, which modern Egyptologists are at a loss to
explain. The idea is to unite with your inner divinity,
or inner god (or goddess) through a ritual that allows
your sense of identity to shift upward into the
individuality (Jung's Self) and away from the personality
or ego. This "key" explains a great deal of the Book of
the Dead. But I was not aware of any theosophists doing
this. Now, one of the so-called dangers of this sort
of magic, is that the shift in consciousness must be
temporary. Failure to properly return and sever the
psychic connections via some suitable banishing ritual,
can lead to the typical pathology that we see so much of.
There is nothing wrong with temporary identification
with divinity - so long as you know what you are doing,
and you return to your own ego after. We also need to
remember that everyone is inwardly spiritual and as divine
as we are - this helps put our inflation into its proper
perspective. Someone who says that she is a goddess and
feels better than everyone else, for example, is being
pathological.

Arthur: I am not sure how central the understanding of the
Masters is to Theosophists>

It is not at all essential to me, Art. I don't
care if they could walk on water, or were no more spiritual
than myself. I guess this is why Paul and other
historians just don't threaten me. It's what they taught
us that is important, not so much who they were (which
is interesting enough, I suppose).

Eldon:<The self-genesis, partly through a Gnostic knowing
of spiritual truths and realities, and partly through a
strong emphasis upon making a creative contribution to the
world, is where the Heart of Theosophy is to be found.>

Amen.

Group Souls: "The term 'group-soul' is used in an attempt
 to find a word which would describe, however imperfectly,
the peculiar aggregates of entities more or less on the
same plane or grade of evolution and who, because of that
fact, find themselves more or less reimbodying in groups or
aggregates. In one repsect the term 'group-soul' is
unfortunate, because it gives the idea that there is but
one soul in the same plane which manifests through all the
individual members of such aggregate groups; and this is
inaccurate." (G de Purucker, Studies in Occult Philosophy,
p 569).

In the sense given by G de P, I think that even we humans
have a group soul (i.e., the human life-wave of which we
are each a part). In synergistics, the whole can be
shown to be more than the sum of its parts - and this
is where the group soul comes from.

JRC: Your posting "psychic powers" was absolutely words
taken from my own mouth. I agree completely. The
notion that we should repress the psychic is self-
defeating insofar as the third objective is concerened. I
do not fault G de P here, though, because I rather agree
with what I believe was his intent - to temporarily
stiffle or ignore the psychic until a certain amount of
compassion for others was instilled, and a sense of
moral values developed. I feel that I have done this
reasonable well. So, to continue stiffling or ignoring
my own psychic inner voice is not only silly, but could
be even more dangerous to myself than practicing psychism.
The Point Loma folks seem to want to outlaw psychic
investigation and use for all time, period. I do not
feel that this was G de P's intent. If he was not
psychic himself, then I certainly have to wonder where
he got his info.

JRC:<Is it not rather bizarre that Theosophy, that actually
helped introduce the concept of clairvoyance as an
operative human ability to the modern western world, seems
to want to avoid any of the difficulties inherent in the
actual practice of it in favor of reading and "studying"
what dead people wrote about it ... that the TS, of all
places, as often as not unconsciously *ejects* those
who possess in fact what the original Theosophists
introduced conceptually to America?>

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you.

Eldon:<From all practical purposes, were we to look upon
 them, and perhaps were we to know them in person, we
might, I'd speculate, not be able to detect that there was
*something special* behind the outer man, something
that transended the apparent human personality. >

I think I would know.

Eldon:<The evolution that is before us, the *important*
part of that evolution, has to do with the unfolding of new
*faculties of consciousness,* which is entirely a different
thing that the unfolding of sense perception on other
planes, nor with reading thoughts, seeing the astral light,
nor using magic to make things happen>

What "faculties of consciousness" did you have in
mind? You seem to have rejected all of the ones that I
would have suggested.

JRC:<, I should say that I have come to greatly dislike the
terms "angel" and "deva" ... as they both carry with them
centuries of connotations, most of which have almost
nothing to do with the "things" I've been working with>

The fact that the names are silly and impractical
is exactly why they SHOULD be used. Using the word Angel,
for example, always brings with it a sense of the unreal
and childish - which helps us from being trapped into
taking them all too seriously, and actually helps us to
keep our sense of control during encounters.

Eldon:<When the Lodge sends out a Messanger, how is that
 Messanger trained? I've seen no article or materials that
discuss this topic in depth. How do you think that he
learned what he taught?>

The Lodge itself inspires them via (dare I say the
naughty p word?) psychism in the form of intuitive
communications. The Messenger is stirred intuitively
and made to wrestle internally with notions and doctrines
that others seem not to care about, or are quite satisfied
using faith. He/she sees a friend die. Or perhaps evil
seems to triumph over good. One or more such experiences
will trigger the inner desire to Know what
the devil is really going on. The Messenger is at such a
level that faith is simply not good enough. So what to do?
 They begin the search or quest, and go through angonizing
years of study, looking for answers. This takes different
amounts of time for different people, but eventually a
little lightbulb sort of lights up over their heads, and it
all begins to make sense. Once the Dark Night of the Soul
is behind them, telepathic communication is established
with the Lodge, and their mission takes form. There are
a lot of missions, and a lot of Messengers (not just
one during the last 25 years of the Chrisitan calendar).
I think that G de P followed this general scenario fairly
well, as did Judge and others. I also believe that some
Messengers remain behind the scenes, and the public never
sees them. Perhaps they write. Perhaps they inspire in
some way. It all depends. But only a few ever go public.
The burden is just too great.

Jerry S.