Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01498)

At 06:44 PM 5/29/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi Alexis, Alan
>
>
>Got the booklet, Alan. I've read it with interest. Many points of view are
>shared by me, as I'm sure by many others too.

Thank you Martin.
>
>One point remains a bit obscure to me, and that's your view on reincarnation.
>You say on p. 24, that 'death isn't (a recurring incident)'.

No, it isn't Martin Euler will die but once, because Martin Euler as an
individual will live but once. As I see it it isn't individual personalities
that "reincarnate" but rather the intrinsic (to the Cosmos) evolving
never-physical immortal intelligence that incarnates serially but not
consequentially. In other words the intrinsic spirit manifests itself by way
of a physical intelligence and learns and expands it's awareness by way of
that manifestation. In the course of that manifestation, the physical
personality (Martin Euler) becomes an energy field (force field) in being.
Energy once created is never lost, ergo, when the personality "dies" (by
which I mean leaves the physical shell) it continues as an
energy-field-in-being and is therefore a independent spirit in its own
right. What it is, however, is what was the mediating factor between the
Intrinsic Evolving Intelligence, and I call that the Virtual Intelligence
entity. It probably best corresponds to metaphysics's "Higher Mind", or at
least that's the thing that comes closest to it.

>You explain this by saying that an individual human being continues as
>an independant spirit in it's own right in the 'post-mortem' state.
>One of the questions one could ask is: what about karma, what about the
>effects of deeds that are not yet equilibrized. How else then by reincarnation
>could these effects or consequences be settled? Please explain to me!

 Martin:

That's a good question and of course I can see why you'd ask it. But, I must
respond by saying that I have a different view of Karma than that which is
taught either by Theosophy or Brahminism or Buddhism. The problem as I see
it is that the universe doesn't function in a retributive manner and by any
other name "karma" is retributive.

The universe itself, is an entirely value-free information system and
nothing at all which an individual does while in the physical state is going
to have more than an attitudinal effect on their future. A person, because
of the things that they do, and because of the way that they think, and
because of WHAT they think, create an environment that colours and flavours
their personal future. But that is the way an individual influences their
post-mortem future, it has nothing at all to do with the universal
intelligence field.

There is no judgement, there is no retribution, "seeking of equilibrium",
there is only a milieu that every individual creates for themselves.

The only think that matters, the only thing in the universe that matters, is
intelligence. It is how that intelligence is utilized and how it processes
and stores information, that is critical. That's what the Universe is all
about, the infinitization of intelligence, and the processing and storing of
information for the use of that intelligence. All information is valid. All
information, and experience is the major source of information, is needful
to the universal data-bank.

What an individual human being does with their personal information
data-bank, matters only within their personal paradigm. It does not matter
in the slightest, within the universal paradigm.

Now as to "reincarnation" as the intrinsic evolving intelligence manifests
serially but non-consequentially, each succeeding manifestation, and I must
emphasize that they are not inter-connected except by way of the Intrinsic
evolving intelligence, is, nonetheless, a consequence of all the previous
manifestations and so is "flavoured" or "coloured" by them. But each of them
is unique and individual and so is the "last in line".

"Karma", to me, is simply one of religion's "little control mechanisms".
It's a way to make people "behave" according to the dictates of religion and
more important than that, the dictates of the people that run the religion.

>Also, how would you account for the vast differences between people,
>unequal opportunities, if not by karma?

Well, of course there's the incarnational process I just described, there's
genetics, there's environmental factors, and things like Nationality and
Ethnicity and skin colour, but most of all, it's "the roll of the dice".
People don't like it, I know, and would rather believe they were born blind
to pay off some old debt. But I am afraid that's not it, some people who are
born blind, are that way because their Mother had syphilis.
>
>
>Now, about religion, that's quite a story! I agree that most of religions
>have become a bit of an empty shell. But what about finding the esoteric
>meanings of what's left of value in them? What do you think about that?

Martin: I have spent more than thirty years in the second object pursuit of
the study and comparison of this planet's religions. My conclusion? They are
ALL utterly empty shells.such esoteric meaning as any of them may once have
contained is long lost, and everything of value is lost with them. Religion
today has only one series of goals,that is the attainment and maintenance of
power, control, and profit, over and at the expense of those who accrue to
the religion in question. The human race would be well shed of the lot of them!
>
>Curiously,
>
>Martin
>
They are unorthodox, but they are my views. I take total responsibility for
them.

alexis dolgorukii>
>