Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00161)

On Fri, 12 Nov 1999 06:08:05 -0800 "W. Dallas TenBroeck"
<dalval@nwc.net> wrote:
Dallas:
> In regard to the use of technical terms, like Atma -- the
 "labeling" was used because I was under the impression
that all those (or most of those) who exchanged ideas over
this study group had read TEH KEY TO THEOSOPHY by HPB and
knew those basic "labels" and what they meant.>

Well, yes Dallas, but still, to read the signpost (in this
case the Key to Theosophy) is not the same as having
actually reached the goal, and how can we know atma (the
highest principle) unless having reached the goal? So that
is why I am a bit hesitant (hope the spelling is correct)
in assuming I understand what you mean when you write about
atma. In fact I am assuming that our ways of thought are so
different, that allthough we base ourselves on the same
literature (something I don't think we should assume about
Kym for instance), we still understand that literature very
differently. I am trying to talk to you, not Blavatsky,
which is why I build in questions like: what do you mean
when you use the word atma? But you explain that very
clearly in this post (at least to my understanding).

> DTB	I agree with what you say, Katinka:  "emotions + thought" is
> what I call
> Kama (desires and passions principle) PLUS Manas (the Mind
> principle).  The combination is referred to by HPB as the "Lower
> Mind" or the "Embodied Mind."

Katinka :
Yes, I know, but using western words is perhaps a better
idea on this list, because it seems to me that the
theosophical words are not popular here and with a reason.

Dallas:
> Cosmically, or individually, there is "desire" as a cause for
> thought and mind-action.

katinka:
Yes, I agree. We might conclude that thought should think
and that emotion should fire the thought and the action..

Dallas:
> At this point I would still say:  What is it in us that
 is able to look at both the mind (thinking) and the
emotions (feeling, desire, passions) and apparently
detached from either ?
 It is this One Consciousness which is derived from the
"ray of the One spirit, the ATMA" which is resident in each
of us and forms the undying basis of our existence.>
Oke, got you.
Dallas:
> DTB	I try not to indulge in just "labeling" to no purpose -- but
> as I said above I had assumed that we were all familiar with what
> HPB wrote at least in the KEY to THEOSOPHY.
Katinka
you define Atma beautifully above, so my question has been
answered.

with best wishes,
Katinka
----------------------
NHL Leeuwarden
hesse600@tem.nhl.nl