Reply to Michael
Sep 02, 1996 09:29 AM
by Keith Price
I can only agree with the first part: "The Mind is the Slayer of the Real".
The second part appears to me a play of words, an aphorism. I wonder whether
one has to steep to considering Eastern thought.
>. That is, we shift the seat of awareness
>or volition from desires and mind, kama and lower manas, to something deeper
>within. . We slay by
>*withdrawing our attention*, by starving them of volitional energy, by having
>our seat of awareness, our first point of action, as arising from deeper
I agree entirely.
>The mind is slain when it understands *for us*, but stops pretending to be us,
>and stops as well fooling us with the notion that we are separate, independent
>individuals, poisoning us with its selfishness and "what's in it for me"
>motivations. The slaying comes from the death of it as an entity, the death
>of it as the center of volition, the withdrawal from it of being the prime
>mover in our constitution. Our thought life is as rich as ever, it's just that
>we are no longer identified with those thoughts. We have realized that we
>are not what we think, and the mind is "silenced" since it no longer takes
I agree again but cannot live with the word "slay". It is the wrong word for
a fine truth.
We all seem to want to transform the word slay into "silenced", paralyze
temporarily, withdraw from, shift attention away from, detach from, remove
energy from etc. No one is suggesting of course that we permanently poison the
mind or lobotomize ourself, of course. Slay sounds almost like a military term
or to assasinate the "ruler" of counciousness and substitute a new "ruler" as
the Voice of the SIlence or Higher motivations and virtues.
Many have echoed ideas from Zen, that enlightenment is achieved after a radical
overturning of consciousness where everything is seen first as spiriutal energy
and secondarily as an illusory physical temporary manifestation of this energy.
Slay may mean, slay the tyrannt part of our mind that always wants to take back
its primary position as satisfier of my desire as opposed to the larger Good.
THus one doesn't destroy the whole mental apparatus, even as lower mind, and
desire, but killl the tyrant and place a new King (these ideas are no dobt
present in Christianity, the King being of course the historical Jesus in
exoteric Cristianity and the gnostic Jesus as inner Son in the esoteric or
interior Kingdom of Heaven).
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application