Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00822)

RIhle@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Jerry Schueler writes>
> >I like to think of reincarnation like sleep.  What you do during
> >the day will likely effect your dreams at night, and what you leave undone
> >during the day will still be waiting for you the next morning.
> 
> Richard Ihle writes>
> God made you write this to give everyone a perfect example of how the grand
> systems of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis may have come into being.
> 
> Which would common observation give information about first--the
> circumstances associated with reincarnation or those associated with sleep?

Bee here,
I thought this little excerpt from the writings of Vitvan might be 
interesting as a thought on reincarnation. Somewhere that I can't just 
locate, he illustrates reincarnation by using the tree as a way of seeing it. 
The tree dies back but the stream of life is dormant there and returns in 
spring to grow leaves, flowers and friut and then dies back for another 
winter. He suggests that we should avoid thinking of the personality as 
returning again, rather a new configuration is assembled along the previous 
lines of force laid down. 

"The Natural Order Process" by Vitvan
 
 We had a pet dog by the name of Pat. Pat died, and someone asked if the dog, 
Pat, would reincarnate. The answer to this question will serve as further 
instruction in the fundamental comprising our foundation work in this course 
and, in this lesson, describe the states of consciousness represented by the 
lowest rungs on the ladder on our diagram. (See next page.)
   
 Imagine a pond of water out of which a cup of water is dipped. Let the pond 
of water represent the animal group-field. When Pat died it was as though a 
cup of water which had been dipped from the pond of water was returned to it 
again. We loved our little god Pat; he became part of our family life; and in 
Pat's sojourn with us he did his share of growing, developing, and expanding 
his little dog-consciousness. So, when his cup of water was returned to its 
pond of Mother-substance, it was as though that cup was more colored in 
energy-quality than when it was first dipped out; and the coloring of Pat's 
cupful changed the energy-quality of the whole pond, even though the change 
was ever so slight. This dipping out and pouring back describes the 
relation of a given animal to its group-field. A given animal cannot function 
independently of its group-field.
   
 Finally there comes a point in expanding consciousness when a given cupful 
is not poured back into the general group-field pond. This phase 
characterizing the process of individualization
 is noted with respect to four families of the animal kingdom; namely, 
Equidae, Elephantidae, Canidae and Felidae (horse, elephant, dog and cat). 
Relative to the whole process this point is an important one. On our ladder 
diagram we mark it with a lamp to symbolize mind, which indicates the 
beginning of individualization from the animal group-field.
   
 The chief observation respecting this rung of the ladder wherein beginning 
individualization takes place might be summarized as follows: the animal 
knows but does not know that it knows; a man knows and knows (or can know) 
that he knows.
   

 
> The possibility always exists, of course, that the analogy has really been
> made between small fact and big fact rather than small fact and big myth.
>  That determination, of course, is where personal theosophy comes into play.
> . . .
> 
> Godspeed,
> 
> Richard Ihle