Nov 13, 1995 08:57 PM
Don & Keith:
> Don writing to Keith
>> Keith's remarks
>>most people do not want to read what others wrote in
>>1888 but want to travel the spiritual path for themselves.
People still read Plato The Bhagavad Gita etc. centuries or more
after they are written because they deal with timeless truths.
The intellectual study of the great truths that are available to us
outside the Mysteries is something that continues to have high
value. The value is in training us in our ability to understand life
and not in culture-specific practices which rapidly go stale or in
scientific materials which could become obsolete in a single day as
new discoveries are made.
The cultivation of the intellect in philosophy and meditative practices
is part of travelling the path. This is more specifically true to those
taking the Jnana Yogic path but is important for all paths.
>I think that reading what others wrote is an important first step
>for afterall you have to get the ideas from somewhere.
The materials written about are not such that someone can get them
by a simple reading. They may not be realized after many readings.
They are dealing with a type of knowledge that can only be communicated
when the student has achieved the proper state of readiness. If it were
simply a matter of writing things down for people to read the Mahatmas
would have done so long ago.
>Reading what people wrote then stopping there and deifying the
>people is IMO bad news.
It would be bad news to deify them. But there are valid spiritual
practices like the Vajarana where as part of the practice one is
taught to respect the guru and the teachings of the school and
the guru's personal teachings. Granted we don't have a living
guru and aren't engaged in a specific practice but the presence
of reverence and respect can be a sign of healthy spirituality.
>One has to take the next step and learn to do for themselves what
>they have read about.
One does have to take the next step. That is to take the teachings
and make them a living practice. One needs to go beyond the words
and acquire the ability to directly know things. One needs to light
an inner fire that leads one to seek out and undertake the Path.
One needs to pick up the spiritual tinder and *make it burn*.
>And not in secret either. The world is different today.
>There can be no more "secret societies". There is no need for them.
There is I'd say a need for them. Not perhaps for Western aspirants
but the Mysteries themselves continue in utmost secrecy. We can debate
the need for intermediate organizations for Western chelas.
>Occult knowledge is now so widely available that the idea of
>keeping anything a secret is an absurdity.
It depends upon what degree of knowledge you are talking about.
In the science-fiction model of the universe there are likely
more-advanced civilizations on other planets. Could there also
be on other Globes of the earth chain? Could the Masters comprise
such a society? And even beyond them the Dhyani-Chohans the
god-men? At some point when you consider groups or societies
more advanced than ours there comes a point where their knowledge
would be considered dangerous and should be kept secret if it
were possible of being known.
>And after one learns to do it for themself the next step is
>to build a reliable science of these altered states. Like any
>science this will be a group process. Not a democratic process
>for we do not vote on the laws of nature but a community process
>where the efforts and trails and errors of all participating will
>lead to the construction of reliable knowledge.
This sounds like what "The Secret Doctrine" says that the Masters
have done for countless generations in their Wisdom Tradition.
>>We are moving from a quaint romantic Victorian discussion of states
>>of consciousness and human evolution to practicing and taking
>>conscious control of the process.
When we *undertake the Path* we do so. Not so I'd think
when we study astral projection in the laboratory.
<<Things like modern brain research and genetic engineering to
<<mention but two offer possibilities that even Blavatsky didn't
Or chaos fractals non-linear dynamics and other matematics
that Plato may not have studied.
>The world is vastly different than it was 100 years ago.
>The world is now interconnected. We are drowning in information.
>Things are more decadent than ever before. There is a deep need for
>spirituality but a rational and reasonable spirituality and one
>that has organically evolved.
Yes we need to evolve new approaches to the spiritual in the
West. That evolution needs to grow over time and come together
from the spontaneous participation of many people.
>You cannot create a paradigm. Paradigms evolve. The best we can
>do is contribute to this process for it is occuring whether we
>want to admit it or not or whether we are aware of it or not.
Agreed. We need to participate in this religion-formulation.
But the religions that we come up with are newly-established
practices for people to undertake. They aren't the direct teachings
of the Mysteries which still can be taught perhaps in some veiled
>>Thus we should not look back but move forward with the wisdom
>>of the past as our guide but not our limitation.
Agreed when we're talking about the process of religion-formulation.
But I would object if this attempts to depict the actual Mysteries
as outmoded wisdom of the past.
>>there is a big difference in analyzing Blavatsky vs. Purucker vs.
>>Leadbetter vs Bailey etc and having the same kind of experience
>>they claim to have had.
An intellectual study is important but it leaves us empty-handed
if we don't do something more.
>these are dramatic experiences full of deep meaning to the indivdual.
>But in time the initial thrill fades and it is then that the mind
>takes over and tries to make sense of the happening.
Yes we all are capable of peak experiences that have a dramatic
effect in setting the tone for our lives.
>I know this was the case with me. In some cases it took me 2-3
>years to "come down" from some of the things I have experienced.
>The experiences are so shattering that it takes time for the
>intial "blast" to fade but fade it does sooner or later.
The feeling of a "blast" comes back again to the Western type
experience of a "dark night of the soul" or a "shattering" when
something new enters one's worldview. We are also able to have
Eastern type experiences of melting blending or flowing into
something new with a sense of "eternal delight". I'm more
inclined to the Eastern way and so it takes on that face to me.
>And when it does and things are again quiet one can then
>ponder even deeper and even further on their significance.
The part of us that ponders and reflects upon the experience
is also that operation of mind which blocks us from having
that experience. It is not like going on a treasure hunt
then coming home and going over our booty. It is rather I
think like having done something grand in our consciousness
then loosing it and clinging to the past experience rather
than looking forward and moving towards the next experience
of openness. The specialness of those grand moments is
always open to us but it is due to rigidity of mind and
fixity of personality that blocks us from it most of the time.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application