Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00458)

Paul writes>
>But the Keith/Richard
>alternative, to say that theosophical/Theosophical insights are
>only relevant within the restricted realm of inner meanings and
>depth psychology, but not in the realm of physical reality,
>throws out the baby with the bathwater.

Richard Ihle writes> 
I am always happy to be in the company of a smart guy like Keith, of course,
but apart from our general agreement that some sort of developed
"theosophical apprehension" may also be necessary to approach subjects like
reincarnation, I am not sure we are linked beyond that.  For example:  I am
not sure what he means by the following:  "We must reach to another level
that we now only intuit as the intuitional or atma-buddhic level.  It is here
that reincarnation makes sense. You have to play our the implicate order
(DNA/cosmic coding) through succesive explicate/material/earth-lives orders."

And as to my side, I am not sure Keith would want to go so far as to join me
in regarding the understanding of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis as
~consolation prizes~.

Guessing from the passage quoted from Paul above, one might not think that
Paul regarded Cosmogenesis as one of the consolation-prize branches of the
Principal Theosophical Philosophy (~PTP~) either.  Indeed, one could almost
read it as meaning that theosophical knowledge about the origin and evolution
of physical reality is the "baby" and that knowledge about the possible
translifetime and psychogenetic transformations of humanity is the
"bathwater."

No, I'll bet Paul didn't quite mean that.  Still, there is a good chance he,
also, may not be ready to join me in the assertion that the laborious study
of HPB's Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis may almost be thought of as merely
going after the consolation prizes.  But why such an assertion to begin with?

Simple:  because perhaps the only part of the PTP which has much to do with
developing Adeptship is ~Psychogenesis~.

Now, I think I have some bad news for any new "Messenger" waiting in the
wings:  You will not be able to "invent" ~Psychogenesis~ from scratch.  It is
already a principal component of THE SECRET DOCTRINE and related writings.
 HPB simply did not name it as such.  When she talks about ~Manvantara~,
~Fohat~ etc., she is talking Cosmogenesis; when she talks about Rounds,
Root-Races etc., she is talking Anthropogenesis; however, when she talks
about ~kama-manas~, higher/lower ego etc. she is simply talking Psychogenesis
without bothering to categorize it with a separate term. 

No, while I have some serious doubts that she had a complete grasp on the
sequential ("psychomaturational") pattern the ~I am~ follows as its new
possibilities for egoic delusions unfold, I have no doubt whatever that when
HPB was talking consciousness, she was talking Psychogenesis.

And as compared with Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis, at least you can ~do~
something with a little understanding of Psychogenesis.  For starters, you
can learn to recognize both your own and other people's egoic ("semi-Self")
indulgences; thus, you can avoid many mistakes resulting from some
"ego-of-the-moment"--your own or someone else's--trying to gain ascendancy
over other egos-of-the-moment in a similar "strata" of differentiated
consciousness.  In short, an understanding of Psychogenesis can help you in
the Actual Work. 

On the other hand, what is your benefit in knowing about some "Lunar Chain,"
the "Lemurians" or a trillion other obscure details on the same order?  How
can such knowledge actually ~improve~ your life?  Can it give you more
energy, intelligence, power, longevity, charisma, sensitivity, or good
health?  More importantly, can it make you ~happy~?  Most importantly, can it
improve your Self-awareness?

No, I don't think so.  There is a significant sense in which Cosmogenesis and
Anthropogenesis may be just ~pure knowledge just for its own sake~.  It is
interesting to think you may know how things work on the macro-scale or
translifetime dimension, but it is doubtful whether such knowledge will help
you with the personal developments which can lighten the earth-globe on your
back enough so that you can start ~playing~ with it. . . . 

No, for this you need Psychogenesis.  Thus, I am hopeful that Paul's passing
inclusion of "depth psychology" with the "bathwater" of the PTP was not
referring to Psychogenesis.  Knowing him, it probably wasn't.  Considering
that the "hydrogen/Oneness" post it was embedded in seemed like a stroke of
genius to me, it probably ~definitely~ wasn't. . . .

Godspeed,

Richard Ihle