Theos-Talk Archives (November 1999 Message tl00195)

Nov 16th 1999

Dear Kym --

I know I brought this down on me. and have this to offer:

Something basic in me (no name needed) is aware (belief or else)
that it IS.
It also assumes that others who respond in a similar manner also:
ARE.
And what I term a "relationship" is any kind of exchange, mental,
verbal, visible or invisible, whether in this life or after
'death' -- and,
in this I assume that the CONSCIOUSNESS of everyone is continuous
and bridges  even "death" as it does "sleep."  or the gap of
unconsciousness when one may be undergoing an operation and such
unconsciousness is needed to avoid the pain as trauma.

And this is an assumption that I cannot prove except empirically.
The Logic appeals to me.  it might not appeal to you.  Then why
and how do such different opinions (sensations, ideas ?) arise?
It is also quite probable that we 'exist' separately as
individuals, each living our own apparently isolated lives, and
yet when we think of each other, or correspond, we send a kind of
"force-field" out that probably encompasses the other --
certainly we are gradually building up a mental construct of each
other, each on their own.

Dreams may not be tangible in the kind of matter we use here
physically.  Theosophy posits "astral matter" -- which may be
true or not.  Then we do have senses of an astral type.  And when
those dream bodies are used and experience (or is it fancy ?) is
recorded and reviewed mentally, there seem to be some relation to
the physical.  In any case I would say that the CONSCIOUSNESS is
unbroken and unitary.  Also seems to be personal to the
individual.  Wasn't there some extensive studies on dreams as
well as "ESP" conducted at Duke University?  By Dr Rhine ?  I
think that they concluded that there was thought transference
over some medium (ether ?) but that was all.

I'm inserting a few notes below in the body of your answer,

Dal

Dallas
dalval@nwc.net=A0
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

-----Original Message-----
> From: KYM C. SMITH [mailto:kymsmith@micron.net]
> Date: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 2:54 AM
> Subject: Re: theos-l digest: November 15, 1999

Dallas wrote:

>To me, we have 3:
>
>1.  - I know I exist.
>2. -  You and the rest of the universe  "out there" also exist.
>3. -  We have on-going relationships of many kinds.
Consequently
>we are able to investigate those relationships.

Hate to nitpik, but, no, we do not know 1, 2, or 3.  We may
BELIEVE we
exist, we may BELIEVE the universe exists, and we may BELIEVE we
have
relationships, but we do not KNOW.  Descartes believed he was
"thinking," -
was he really thinking or just believing that he was?

DTB	 Objection noted and agreed -- now what would be the paths to
finding out a pattern of actuality in this?  If a sufficient
number of people refer to similar (analogous) experience such
patterns arise.  Conclusions would then be :

1	phenomena though varied is a common experience.
2.	Memory is fragmentary and not uniformly available -- it may be
wispy or very detailed.
3.	Is there a link between waking and dreaming consciousness?
4.	Do minds affect each other at a distance ?  Is this only
statistical or actual ?
	Are some persons more reliable than others?  Is there a pattern
of sensitivity?
5.	Is 'thought" the same as or different from a "feeling"
6.	Can thoughts be changed at will?
7.	What is the will and who uses it?

Just a few Ideas I have not completely answered but am working on
---------------------------

I mean, Dallas, do I exist "outside of you" or is my existence in
your own
mind?  If you were to see me on the street, would that mean that
I exist?
You read my posts, but is it another distinct being writing to
you, or your
mind using clever means in which to talk to itself?  In dreams, I
can
touch, hear, and feel 'things,' but do they exist?

DTB	Probably not physically, but only as impressions -- and even
if tenuous, the
	experience does leave an impression -- if so, why?

Number three of your argument is especially touchy - how does a
relationship exist?  Does it cease to exist when you die?  If so,
was the
relationship only in your mind?  In order to investigate a
relationship, we
must become intimate with the one or thing with whom we are
having the
relationship - if we cannot, then the relationship may only exist
in your
own mind, whereas for the other person, maybe no relationship
existed at
all.  So, did the relationship exist 'in its ownself' or only in
your mind?
 If something can be considered existing, even if it only exists
in one's
mind, then does everything we "think" exist?

DTB	I would say that any relationship is automatically a personal
mental construct.  Anything you hear read, handle, makes a memory
impress which can be deep or shallow -- but in hypnosis all such
memories seem to be recoverable -- so one might conclude that
they are not "lost."

You and I exchange ideas over Internet - so I assume you exist,
wherever you are, just as I hope you make a similar assumption
concerning me.  To doubt, to be skeptical is fine, but like
everything it can be exaggerated, and then what remains?  Only
one's own self.  But not the physical self - 0 no - only that
element of consciousness that cannot be extinguished.

Define "existence."  Is it material, thought-forms, both,
neither,
something more, a combo, what?

I'm not being flippant here, really.  If one wants to say they
"believe"
they exist, I do not have a problem with that, but to say "I know
I exist"
causes a red flag to pop up in my brain.

Now, for me, if this red flag is not real, does not really exist,
should I
ignore it and let my imaginary angst go when people say "I know I
exist?"

DTB	Dear Kym I do not know how or why that happens -- I am a
great believer in the existence of everything and to share the
Universe with them is quite natural. I will willingly grant them
every faculty that I possess and without any question at all.
Space?  It is everywhere and without limits.  Life -- again it is
present everywhere -- and no limits that I can discern.  Now in a
body, now outside of one, but always an enigma.

It is to me like a seeking for the cause of all things -- it is
not to be found, and yet, it is necessary to all that we live in
and are.  And I think it drives people like you and me on to seek
and seek until we have an understanding of ourselves and THAT
 or is it, IT ?).

The theosophical philosophy posits that behind the "atom" there
are forces that assemble the needed materials for its
"ex-istence."

Scientifically, starting from our base of material physical
perceptions, We have as yet no sure means of physically
determining what those are, so we assume that they are "fields"
of elecro-magnetism, of some power, and being very small, that
power is enormous and stable.  The result is that Science
presumes the atom, etc to be in continuous vibratory or rotatory
motion and also capable of some degree of consciousness or
sensitivity that is individual to itself.  Atoms of the same
"substance" are deemed to be all closely similar, and yet careful
investigation shows them to exhibit anomalies, so that they are
not all cut from an indentical pattern, but each seems to have
its own peculiarities.  On a far larger scale the individuals of
any species could be also described similarly.  In spite of our
many differences, we are all "humans."  What Identifies us is the
curious power of "thought."

What conjoins to form a "human?"  Physical evolution for physical
sensitivity of form.  Mental sensitivity for sbtleness of thought
and feeling.  Aspiration and a sense of ethics, which seems to
indicate an idealism the source of which is not quite
identifiable, but appears to be a component.

Dal

and all good wishes to you

Kym

---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as: DALVAL@NWC.NET
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=3Dtheos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-530Y@list.vnet.net