Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00960)

Richard:
> 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."
	History shows that this is true.  However, history also shows
that the TS cannot hold these folks for very long.  They tend to leave in
disgust  and set up their own organizations.

> Let's not make too much of
>beatific smiles until they are put to the test by a little arthritis and
>geriatric ass-dragging.
	As a geriatric ass-dragger with arthritis myself, I
wholeheartedly agree.

> ....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.
	This idea is a traditional magical technique, and should
not be lightly disregarded.  Role models are important in any
endeavor which seeks to change the ego-personality into
something new.  While such advancement may be chimerical
at the outset, in time it can become cemented into place in a
more lasting form.  One idea is to cultivate better skandhas with
which to use next time around, or at the least, this could be an
unforseen fallout.

> 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.
	I think that this up-and-down roller-coaster road is a natural
one, and I am rather sceptical of any claims that suggest a steady upward
progress with no backsliding.  I believe that backsliding is part of our
human nature.  However, we almost never backslide all the way down
to our foremost lowest levels, and so there is a general progression
within the spirals that I think we all undergo.  Personally, I have always
been unable to meditate every day--at least not successfully.  I think
that those who do, are kidding themselves if they think each day is a
benefit.  On the other hand, we aught not get depressed when we do
have a bad day or two, and not let this cause us to lose sight of the
goal.  We must take the downs with the ups, and keep TRYing.

>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.
	Whether one is a high soul or not, will tend to show up in
the results, sooner or later, if one persists.  However, even if results are
shallow, this aught not to daunt us from TRYing.  Everyone has to start
somewhere.  And at some point, maybe after 50+ years of persistent effort,
a door will open and we will wonder why it took us so long to see what was
right before us all along, and know for a fact that the effort was all
worthwhile.
Sometimes I think that what we get out of meditation is proportional to
the effort that we have put into it.

>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).
	While this is true (speaking in generalities) I doubt that most
of the younger members would agree (I probably wouldn't have, when I
was young).  Age-related stages and stages are difficult to understand
or accept, at times, until you actually get there yourself.  But I am preaching
to the choir here.

> I have never personally experienced such a
>more suspiciously heavy-duty aggregation of possible higher types than I have
>run across on Theos-l.
	I think this is a compliment, gang.  Thanks.  <blush>

>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?
	I hate to admit this, but in my youth, I did, in fact, have this
as my goal in life.  Somewhere along the line, I changed my mind (my
wife helped twist me arm a bit).  Probably I am simply not an "older soul"
in the first place.  But anyway, I decided to stick around and learn as
much as I can, and maybe do some good for other people along
the way.  Death, after all, comes soon enough anyway.  Why hasten it?
Actually, I am more afraid ot rebirth, than I am of death (which would be
a release from my arthritis).

>  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)
	Richard, I am curious.  Why "five" and not seven?  As for
"one extra Lap" I have never doubted this, and the "powers that be"
seem to love to goad some Monads into it.

> 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.
	Agreed.  But when haven't there been Adepts?

>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. . . .
	I suspect that you are on to something.  The desire to Know
leads to the desire to Help.  And all it takes, is desire itself.

> ...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. . . .
	You might want to borrow one of Chuck's helmets.<g>

	Thanks for the interesting post.

	Jerry S.
	Member, TI