Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00192)

Titus Roth writes:
>>> Titus wrote
>
>> and kymsmith@micron.net responded:
>
>
>>> True in a sense. But on grand time scales, I think human beings *are* an
>>> exception. Man, having consciousness, has a different destiny than 
>>>mineral, plant or animal life.
>
>> A different destiny?  How many different destinies are there?
> 
>I don't think, for example, that a plant reincarnates and will become more
>conscious. That's one difference in destiny. Animals are invaluable supports
>to man and may reincarnate, but I don't think they will evolve in
>consciousness as we do. Is there a statement behind the question?

Well, one *could* think of it in this way.  That it is not so much a question 
of consciousness as self-consciousness that we evolve.  Our ability to say "I 
am" has to be developed.  It can't just appear out of nowhere.  I suppose it 
*could*, but logically I'd have to assume that it doesn't happen that way.  
Theosophically, as I understand it, every atom in existence innately desires 
self-consciousness and pure spirituality.  These atoms would probably be 
considered the minerals and elements.  One of the first things they need to 
experience in order to have saelf-consciousness is a uniqueness among others.  
Hence plant-life.  The monads, between root-races and rounds, "change" 
themselves by their innate, yet still unconscious wills (swabhavas), into the 
most simple life form, i.e. unique form.  Like humans, I don't think you can 
ever have two plants that look exactly the same, grow at the same rate, or 
produce the same amount of fruit or whatever.  Each one of them has a unique 
pattern.  The atomic elements show proise of having a unique pattern as well 
in regards to the boson. (proton)  One can split the boson of a proton, 
shattering it, and it will reconstruct itself, retrieve the scattered 
particles, "remember" where they go, and get them back in place, totally 
reconstructing the proton.  So there is uniqueness on the subatomic level as 
well.  But anywho...

Plants are most definitely unique.  They have individual characteristics, or 
are starting to show them at this stage, but they are in stasis.  They don't 
have a lot to do.  They have fewer senses than do the animals and man.  They 
cannot see, or hear, or taste, or smell as we do, but I believe they do have 
senses which we cannot comprehend as of yet.  Nevertheless, throughout their 
lives, their experience is pretty much the same.  One place, same scenery, 
same "whatever" that they sense if they sense anything. (Which they most 
likely do.)

So the next thing the monad wants to do innately and unconsciously, is to get 
more expewriences out of its life.  To gain even more individuality.  To get 
five senses instead of one or two.  To see things.  To hear things, smell them 
taste them and feel them.  Then, not only are there more experiences but it 
asdds to the variety of different ones that each animal can have.  They have 
true individuality.  They can set themselves apart from others.  They almost 
have the ability to say "I am"  I've always thought it somewhat poetic that 
when an animal is dying, one of the last things it might say to itself is, "I 
don't want this to happen to me.  I don't want to die."  It is the point when 
an animal realizes that it is an individual.

So when that monad is in its fourth round(actually right before it) it can say 
to itself "I am"  And from itself will come the "I am I", the human ego.  
Which eventually manifests itself as the human being.  

What it comes down to, as I understand, is that the sole purpose of all the 
rounds and root races is simply to develop a self-conscious monad, which can 
only be done through matter, for only senses and experience lead to 
individualism, hence the "descent".

>In my very pedestrian understanding of Ecclesiastes, it seems to me the 
>authoris using another example of how transitory one life is. We will lose 
>allearthly things we vainly strive for - and in this respect share the same 
>fateas animals. "All is vanity and vexation of spirit." Are you interpreting 
>itdifferently? Please say more.
>
>>> It really boils down to how God can give us free will, but nevertheless
>>> keep us from using that free will to permanently get on the wrong track.
>>> Though it looks ridiculously simple, the answer is: karma! 
> 
>> Karma, in a way, has negated the need for God.  Karma takes the place of
>> God, performs all justice, offers all reward.  What is God's role as long 
>>as karma rules?

I really don't think free will was so much "given" as discovered, like 
mathematical theorems(sp?).  We have always had will throughout our existence 
as monads and animals and plants, but I think free will actually camesomewhere 
during the animal stage.  Perhaps in higher root-races.  Don't really know.  
Perhaps free will is the same as saying self-consciously directed will.  In 
other words, it's the same will that we have had since the beginning of the 
manvantara, only we recognize ourselves and our wills and can now control them.

I can agree that God gave us free will only by defining God as the Wonderous 
Being (the great banyan) from which we came and of which we are, and by saying 
that, as a part of that being we have a will as well.

>There is more to life than karma. God is certainly large enough to contain 
>thelaw of sowing and reaping - and then some. There are "gifts" from God 
>that wecertainly haven't fully earned, but receive out of His Love. Kind of 
>like aparent asking that a child earn some money, but then giving double 
>what thechild earns once he has shown he is responsible.

I agree that there is more to life than karma.  If Gautama Buddha can get away 
with being immune to karma why can't I?  I also understand how you are trying 
to compare "gifts from God" to the love and method of reward to a child from a 
parent.  However, I can't entirely agree with it.  I don't really totally 
understand the analogy.  What are some examples of the gifts to which you are 
referring?  Are they only explainable as gifts from God?

---
The Triaist