Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01092)

Jerry S. writes>

>	Excuse me for butting in here.  I want to point out that both
>	the higher and lower manas are essentially image-makers.
>	 Kama-manas simply adds emotional charges to the images.
>	When we die, we lose our brains, and with it the power to think
>	logically and rationally.  What we have instead, is an outpouring
>	of karmic images.

Richard Ihle writes>
Here is a place where we will have to agree to look at what is being said
from the other person's point of view in order to get at any possible
underlying truth.  If you say anything further on this, I will try to
remember that you see *manas* as "image-maker."

My view is pretty strongly that *manas* is more closely *associated* (but not
synonymous) with "word-production" ("verbal thought-creation").  I base this
entirely on my own repeated meditative observations of the "sequence"
mentioned previously; thus, I make no claim that this is What It Really Is
for everyone.

However, I believe you and I can be still on the same track if you will allow
me to take off the *manas* from your statement so that it reads thus:  "Kama
simply adds emotional charges to the images."  It also can, of course,
determine the shape/nature of the images one is experiencing/producing.  I
think you and I may agree that this is the pitfall for most would-be
magicians--i.e., that they inadvertently introduce more desire/like/hate into
their consciousnesses than they had previously.

In my view, a kama-manas technique would involve the addition of some sort of
verbal
component--praying/talking/listening/directing/describing/characterizing/etc.-
-in connection with the images.

An example of a pure manas technique would be, in my view, something like
self-hypnosis.

Now, does this mean that I think that inner imagery has no place in advanced
magic (or advanced perception, for that matter).  Not at all.  Just as you
point out that an otherwise neutral image can be "imbued" by acting upon it
with the kama in one's own consciousness, I am suggesting that "wordless
Buddhic perception/intentionality" is also a "tool" which can be used when
working with inner imagery.

Consequently, you may have noticed in all of this that you have almost
already won me over to your point of view that the state of consciousness we
clumsily call *Buddhi-manas* is not necessary incompatible with inner
imagery. . . .

Godspeed,

Richard Ihle