[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Art: Group Project Question 1

Sep 23, 1995 01:21 PM
by Lewis Lucas

> Unfortunately Hendrix and other voyagers of consciousness take a improper
> pride in what they experienced and the fact that others have not . This
> does not lead to enlightment but arrogance. Spiritual hedonism is no better
> than material hedonism.

Lewis: Yes, I agree.

> >Lewis: I am confused. Aren't "blinds" a very useful window
cover?:) >
> No blinds seem to be intentional distractions from the truth so that those
> of lesser evolved spirituality can not see what is going on.

Lewis: I can think of a couple of reasons why "those of lesser
evolved spirituality" might be kept ignorant of certain laws in
nature. Knowledge is power. Can't you?

> > It seems to me sometimes we complain to much about heirarchy and
> >authority, as if it were some shackle forced upon us. Might it be us
> >and not them who create these heiarchies and give Them their
> >authority. As we become more centered, stronger, knowledgeable
> >doesn't the need/desire for outside authority atrophy? Maybe we are
> >railing against a natural law which has its place in the scheme of
> >things, but falls away or diminishes because (to paraphrase another
> >of J.J. van der Leeuw's works) we are all gods in the becoming.
> >
> > If we accept HPB, the Mahatmas, Jesus, or some other teacher as
> >an authority it is, in part, a recognition by us of Their valuable
> >experiences. As children we often look up to our parents and other
> >adults for guidance and support until we grow strong and wise enough
> >to support and counsel others.

> Perhaps this could be construed as arrogant but I don't like the idea of
> men and women in the Twentieth and Twenty First Century thinking of
> themselves as children - I don't mind childlike but childish and immature
> too undeveloped to take responsibility then I have a reaction. I can image
> that some take the master to be the mom and dad they never related to and
> want to be cuddled into consciousness by a benevolent higher being. That is
> regression not progression. I am in no way saying that a sophisticated and
> well won understanding of the Masters would lead to this infantilism but it
> is certainly a danger.
> It takes more than a good brain to acquire esoteric knowledge - the
> character as Blavatsky tells us needs forming first.
Lewis: Yes, I agree we are not children and are responsible for own
spiritual growth. I was trying to communicate the value of mentors,
which I think we have already agreed upon. The word "master" carries
a lot of baggage for you and many others.

 These "mentors" of HPB said the goal was "childlike" and not
childishness. I think this point is made in "At the Feet of the
Master" by Alycone. They also say in their letters that their chelas
are left to their own devices because an Adeptship is won by our own
hard won efforts. It is not something which can be given, and if it
could be it would be of little value.

 I understand your concerns, as did HPB, about making a paternal
god to whom we abdicate all responsibility and authority to and
become "infantile".

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application