Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00481)

Richard: 

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."

Keith:

I am not sure what I mean either, to tell the truth, which is probably not a
surprise ;-)
I guess what I was getting a is t that your can't measure a spritually framed
idea as reincarnation  with a thermometer (physical instrument),
Rosharch test (emotional response instrument), IQ test (inteligence measuring
instrument), or particle accelarator (sub-atomic measuring  instrument).  We
fall back on the only measuring instrument we have which is our intuition,
buddhi-manas, third eye or whatever you want to call it.  We can never know
about something like reincarnation unless we go to an appropriate instrument
which measure that level, vibration, or organizing  structure of reality.  Its a
taxonomny problem.  

This instrument is provided free of charge, so to speak by the DNA coding that
replicated the human with the seven bodies.  The charge, I guess, is that we
must develop these instruments over many lives until we can get clear enough on
what is real (?!) and on what level.  Our physcial senses do a really good job
of getting around the physical world,  I wouldn't  blindfold myself and depend
on my intuition or buddhi-manas to get me home safely while driving a car.  I
need my arms and ears even if they structure a limited perspective as illusion,
it is a necessary illusion, an appropriate illusion and all the better by not
cluttering my mind with spiritual "noise" while I am in the passing lane at 70
miles an hour.

We sharpen the practicality of  our senses by practice  ( typing for example)
and maybe we sharpen our spiritualitiy by practice of another sort.   The idea
of a Zen archer is an attempt to merge the two levels.

As far as being linked, I think Richard and I are probably very closely linked
on the reincarnation issue and I look forward to his post on his
"Psychogenesis".  I think we are all linked to some degree by our concern for
theosohpy. I don't think we have to be in exact SYNCH however.  I think this we
have done in past lifetimes, perhaps focing or being forced to accept a common
canon of scripture and religious practice for the sake of the community.  We did
that very effectively before.  I am not sure if I was a Spanish Inquisitor or
got burned at the stake for sorcery/witchcraft. but I cannot stand someone
oppresively forcing their spiritual ideas on me even if it is done out of "love"
and to "save my soul so we can be together with Jesus for all eternity".  Not
this lifetime anyway!  (shallow laugh, sigh)

I am not sure, but the way I think Richard and I are linked is in our desire and
willingness to forward from a theosphical perspective into the future, expanding
and enlivening it, rather that being linked to the past, no matter how glorious
and valuable.  Being linked to the past, doesn't make everyone in sync either,
since we all have a differnt subjective perspective on the supposedly objective
past.

Not sinking into past  synch, but linking toward the  future brink ( no I
haven't been drinking)  :)

Namaste
Keith Price

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~.