Theos-Talk Archives (December 1998 Message tl00002)

Dec 30th 1998

Dallas offers:

In my esteem the Mahatmas in writing as they did desired to
distinguish between the SELFISH and the UNSELFISH "Paths" and
those who follow those two schools - imbued with the motives and
choices relative to those separate states of mind and personal
"goals."

There were at that time some confusion (and it apparently still
persists, mainly because we are only able to perceive the
EXTERNAL APPEARANCE of things and people, and are unable to see
what their inner nature and motives are) as regards Tibetan
sects - so it became necessary for the Mahatmas in writing
Sinnett and Hume (and others) to draw those distinctions.  They
speak mainly about the inner motives.

Applications can be made all around the world when we consider
the motives that drive religious movements (especially the
congregational ones:  Judaism, Islam, Christianity).  In addition
to this are the motives of those who participate (and who does
not ?) in "capitalism," "socialism," and various other forms of
business and politics, where living conditions are enforced on
vast masses of people.

Essentially to me, the ethical and moral implications of
Theosophical philosophy and doctrine are more important than
details.

The "way out of this morass" is to first apprehend what are the
basic concepts of continuing life"
1) the immortality of man's True Essence - his Spiritual
Soul-Mind;
2) that this is not only man's condition but that there is a bond
between every least component of Nature, taken as a whole.
3) the progress of all beings is evolutionary, is essentially one
of a growth of intelligence and consciousness rather than merely
a physical one.
4) Nature is lawful in its entirety and impartial, universal and
immutable LAWS prevail and pervade the whole of Nature in all its
departments, of which Mankind is one.
5) All evolution starts on the subtle planes of Spiritual nature
and concurrent with those are the development of material forms.
At this our present stage, the two have merged.  Consequently we
perceive in our minds and feeling natures the conflict and
uncertainty of the two divergent/convergent streams of
development.  It becomes our duty to resolve these in our own
minds - by studying Nature and OURSELVES and our capacities and
potentials.

Much more could be said, and in fact is said in Theosophical
literature - such as emanated from the pen of HPB.  It deserves
correlation and close study in order to verify its accuracy.
Such study has to be done individually.

There can be no vicarious advance.  No one can trust any
conclusions except his own.  The conclusions that are offered by
many who are good thinkers need to be carefully reviewed,
questioned, and checked by each "student" in this vast School of
Life and living.

All through the writings of HPB one can find that she
distinguishes between the "DOCTRINE OF THE EYE," and the
"DOCTRINE OF THE HEART."  The first is intense selfishness and
isolation from the rest of Nature - even though this is quite
impossible - it is an impossible attitude when forced to its
logical conclusions.  The second is found to harmonize with
nature's ways of adjusting evolution in the widest possible sweep
of view.  It is brotherly, compassionate, considerate, merciful,
forgiving, and yet demands that we as independent minds prove
this each for themselves.

Much is left unsaid in this brief answer.

But if more detail is needed, ask further.

Dallas

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of
> Caldwell/Graye
> Sent:	Wednesday, December 30, 1998 7:31 AM
> To:	theos-talk@theosophy.com; blafoun@azstarnet.com
> Subject:	Theos-World Questions for Rich, Jerry, Dallas et al
> concerning what the Mahatmas are talking about in their
> references about "Shammars", "Dugpas" etc.
> 
> SUBJECT:  Questions for Rich, Jerry, Dallas et al concerning what
> the
> Mahatmas are talking about in their references about "Shammars",
> "Dugpas" etc.
> 
> It would appear that the first reference to "Shammars" and "Red
> Caps"
> in the Mahatma Letters is found in Letter No. 49, received by Mr.
> Sinnett
> in early August 1881.  The passage from KH reads in the 2nd
> edition:
> 
> "We feel that the time is approaching, and that we are bound to
> choose
> between the triumph of Truth or the Reign of Error and -- Terror.
> We
> have to let in a few chosen ones into the great secret, or --
> allow the
> infamous Shammars to lead Europe's best minds into the most
> insane and
> fatal of superstitions -- Spiritualism; and we do feel as if we
> were
> delivering a whole cargo of dynamite into the hands of those, we
> are
> anxious to see defending themselves against the Red Capped
> Brothers of
> the Shadow."
> 
> The next reference in a Mahatma Letter to "Dugpas" and "Gelugpas"
> appears in a letter from "M":
> 
> "Only, look out sharp; the Dugpas and the Gelukpas are not
> fighting in
> Tibet alone; see their vile work in England. . . .I tell you the
> Shammars are there already and their pernicious work is
> everywhere in
> our way.  Do not regard this as metaphorical but as a real fact,
> which
> may be demonstrated to you some day."  ML #47, 2nd edition,
> March 1882.
> 
> NOW HERE ARE THE VITAL QUESTIONS:
> 
> Even if we concede for the sake of discussion that the Dugpas are
> actually the Bonpas, what do the Dugpas and Shammars have to do
> with
> events in Europe and England?
> 
> What are the Mahatmas actually referring to when referring to the
> PERNICIOUS work of the Shammars?  To their VILE  work?
> INFAMOUS Shammars?  And what work in Europe and
> in England?
> 
> Pretty strong language!?
> 
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
> theos-talk@theosophy.com
> 
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting
> of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------