Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00933)

In a message dated 96-04-22 09:40:47 EDT, Paul writes>

>The bottom line is-- regardless of where they stand
>on the liberal-conservative spectrum, Theosophists tend to be
>inflexible.  How often does anyone post here along the lines of
>"here's a new thought I never had before, a new book containing
>information I never knew before, an emotional response I never
>felt before"?  Mostly, people tend to just repeat their strong
>allegiance to their own point of view, rather than yielding,
>modifying, growing.  At least this is so in comparison to
>Medit-l, which is full of people more interested in daily
>practice than abstract theorizing, more concerned with
>understanding others of different viewpoints than with
>triumphing over them.  That keeps the list fresh and alive, at
>least for now.  I wish theos-l would have more of that spirit.

Richard Ihle writes>
Hi, Paul.  I recently subscribed to Medit-l so I have an idea of what you are
talking about--some very good people seem to be there.

However, are the meditators more to be admired because of their
"flexibility," "attempts to understand rather than triumph," etc. than the
"ask-no-quarter-nor-give-any" man-o'-wars who often show up in the
Theosophical (TS) context?

Not necessarily, in my opinion.

My reason for saying this is purely theosophical.  In other words, it belongs
to that category of knowledge which has no real empirical or logical basis:
 I simply have the same *growing certainty* about it as I do about the more
standard theosophical ideas--karma, reincarnation, etc.

I have "sensed" for many years that there is something very preternatural
about the Theosophical Society.  Perhaps saving most readers a lot of
horizontal-head-shaking time, let me just short-cut and say that I am now
more persuaded than not that the TS has served in the past--and still serves,
albeit in perhaps a dangerously diminishing degree, in the present--as an
"Esoteric Attraction Point" for a certain "subset" of  "higher-degree souls."

I honestly suspect that there is a possibility that the individuals who are
drawn and continue to subject themselves to the sometimes hellish
interactions of something like Theos-l may be actually more advanced in
Self-awareness than those who may gather in more "benignant" and ostensively
"spiritual" ambiences.

How do I know this?  Well, I don't know it; as I have said, I just have a
growing theosophical certitude about it--the slowly creeping "peace which
passeth understanding," perhaps.

Here is at least one thought:

The *age* question.  My guess is that a sizeable percentage of those on
Medit-l are in their twenties or thirties.  If this is so, my prediction is
that when they are in their fifties, only about 5% will still be meditating
each day.  This means nothing in itself, of course, but I have known more
than a few seeming archangels of young adulthood whose completely pedestrian
mode of travel in later adulthood showed that their previous wings had merely
been those supplied by "the Sweet Bird of Youth."  Let's not make too much of
beatific smiles until they are put to the test by a little arthritis and
geriatric ass-dragging.

And according to "Psychogenesis," of course, the first five cycles in the
progressive unfoldment of potential egoic delusion are not even completed
until age thirty-five--and this assumes that the individual has a high enough
Degree of Self-awareness that he or she will regularly be proded up to the
Fifth Level to indulge the multiplicity of desire-free "semi-Selves" which
potentially might form there.  Thus, what we might be seeing on Medit-l may
be many individuals who can overcome the delusion that they really ARE their
desire-mental ideas, but who can not yet fight the good fight against the
egoic mistake that they really ARE their dispassionate mentation. This is not
a flaw or anything; it is simply the result of their possibly not yet being
chronologically old enough to have "psychomatured" into the Fifth-Cycle
Ego-Arena.

Furthermore, there is typically a lot of "posturing" associated with the
Desire-Mental (kama-manas) Cycle.  Much of the "yielding, modifying,
growing," etc. may indeed be the actual result of meditative practice
temporarily elevating the individuals toward "less-differentiated" states of
consciousness (toward the "Spiritual"); however, much of the "good behavior"
could also simply be a result of making themselves behave according to the
"idea of the Spiritual person"--the mental idea which attracted them in the
first place.

In both instances, "advancement" may be chimerical.  In the first place,
consciousness is an up-and-down situation, changing from day to day,
sometimes moment to moment--especially if one stops meditating regularly.
 Incremental improvement in Degree of Self-awareness, on the other hand, is
of much greater duration.  It is impossible to tell whether one is a high
degree soul merely on the basis of whether one is crabby and depressed or
blissed-out and effervescent.  All one can really guess at from these things
is whether an individual has been indulging levels of consciousness which are
"too far away" or close to the Degree of Self-awareness he or she has.

By contrast, the majority of those on Theos-l appear to be a much older
group; most seem to have long experience working at the first five levels (a
younger person can *utilize* desire-free mentation, for example, but not *BE*
the desire-free mentation in an egoic sense until he or she enters the
appropriate age-related psychomaturational cycle).  There is some
desire-mentalism in evidence on Theos-l, of course (psychomaturing through
all the levels merely means you are free to egoically delude yourself in any
of them, any time you want), but there seems to be much material posted which
has the character of "pure, dispassionate explication" (manas level).

. . .Anyway, even I bore myself with explaining Psychogenesis nowdays;
therefore suffice it to say that I have never personally experienced such a
more suspiciously heavy-duty aggregation of possible higher types than I have
run across on Theos-l.  The ~I AM~ quality is not always pretty and pleasant
when it sometimes "contaminates" itself at this level of consciousness or
that; however, many of these people seem BIG . . . VERY BIG  . . . to me.

But then . . . why don't these big, "older souls" just get busy and meditate
themselves into *nirvilkalpa samadhi*, thereby checking out of the
Reincarnating Stream and not bothering other people with their arguments any
longer?  Well, that leads me to another one of my theosophical growing
certitudes:  I am actually starting to be persuaded that a certain small
percentage of "Monads," for one reason or another, are drawn back into
incarnation for "one extra Lap" (I believe *five* is it for the general
mass).  These oldest of souls, I am starting to be persuaded, will appear
(and perhaps some *are* already appearing) in the Sixth Degree of
Self-Awareness, and their remaining earthly task will be to make themselves
Adepts by means of the discrimination this development provides.

Who knows?  Perhaps it is the theosophical enterprise itself--the *desire* to
know that which can only be known by means of transcendental, mystical,
intuitive, or higher perceptual insight--which is the "mechanism" which keeps
calling them back into life again and again. . . .

Indeed, who knows?  There also might be a pack of future Adepts posting on
Medit-l right now. (And if for some illogical and inexplicable reason they
all start joining the Theosophical Society, I'll really start to wonder. . .
.)  For now, however, I am not willing to say that "flexibility" tells me
very much.  For now, at least, my Self-awareness money remains on the old
Theos-l crowd (which includes you)--despite the fact that about two dozen of
the "no-other-*I-AM*'s-higher-than-I-AM" types are just about getting ready
to call me on the carpet for trying to patronize them. . . .

Godspeed,

Richard Ihle