Hi everybody!

I have received a few questions from a person interested in Theosophy named Sol. Here are some of the questions.

~~~

“What are the Solar Logoi?”

--> They are the seven Guardian-spirits of our solar system. They are the same as the Christian archangels.

“ ‘The Primordial Seven’ are the Archangels of Christianity, the Dhyan Chohan.” (The Secret Doctrine, vol 1 p 88).

[The Dhyani-Chohan] “... are the collective hosts of spiritual beings — the Angelic Hosts of Christianity, the Elohim and ‘Messengers’ of the Jews — who are the vehicle for the manifestation of the divine or universal thought and will. They are the Intelligent Forces that give to and enact in Nature her ‘laws,’ while themselves acting according to laws imposed upon them in a similar manner by still higher Powers....“ (H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. 1 p 38)

They also correspond to the group of spirits that created humanity in Genesis 1:26.

“Then the Gods said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...” (Genesis 1.26)

“How do the Seven Logoi put their respecting effects upon atoms of each plane or what are these effects?”

--> I think you are referring to the seven Rays. Each Logos is of a particular Ray. I do not know how each Logos (Through its Ray) affects a particular atom.

“What is the relationship between Cosmic Logos and Solar Logos?”

--> All Logoi are part of a Hierarchy. There are numerous Logoi, all emanating from a single head Logos. Here is a graphic representation of the Hierarchy, from the universal Logos down to our Planetary Logos (and lower)

“What is the work of the Solar, Cosmic, and Planetary Logos?”

--> The purpose of the Cosmic Logos is to build our universe. The purpose of the Solar Logos is to build our solar system. The purpose of the Planetary Logos is to build our Earth. (There are also lower guardian-spirits, including ones for each Root-race and Sub-Race.) All of this is done for one reason – to build a place where you and I can have concrete, physical experiences. .

“What is Fohat”

--> Fohat is the energy of the universe.

“Fohat ... is Cosmic Electricity.” (SD vol I p. 76)

“Fohat, then, is the personified electric vital power, the transcendental binding Unity of all Cosmic Energies, on the unseen as on the manifested planes, the action of which resembles — on an immense scale — that of a living Force.... On the earthly plane his influence is felt in the magnetic and active force generated by the strong desire of the magnetizer. On the Cosmic, it is present in the constructive power that carries out, in the formation of things — from the planetary system down to the glow-worm and simple daisy — the plan in the mind of nature, or in the Divine Thought, with regard to the development and growth of that special thing. In his secondary aspect, Fohat is the Solar Energy, the electric vital fluid, and ... Electricity.” (SD vol I pp. 109-110)

“What is Mulaparakriti?”

--> Mulaprakriti is the basic substance of the universe. It is the substance from which atoms are built. Geoffrey Barborka calls it “pre-cosmic pre-matter”.

“What is Koilon?”

--> Koilon, as far as I can tell, is the same as Mulaprakriti. Leadbeater is the only Theosophist I have seem who uses this word. (I do not know why Leadbeater uses the word Koilon instead of Mulaprakriti.)

“What is Prakriti?”

--> Prakriti is listed as Nature. It is also listed as “that which comes from Mulaprakriti”. (Mulaprakriti literally means the root of Prakriti.) Perhaps it refers to all aspects of our physical universe.

Leadbeater describes the first appearance of atoms as “holes” dug into Mulaprakriti. This makes sense to me, because the beginning of our universe is described as a “differentiating” of Mulaprakriti. The “holes”, then, are differentiations within Mulaprakriti. It is also good to remember that, at the end of our cosmos, these “holes” will cease to exist, and Mulaprakriti will return to its normal undifferentiated state.

“What are Dhuta(s), Bhatu(s) and Tattwa(s)?”

--> I am not familiar with Dhutas and Bhatus. Tattwas (Tattvas) are distinctive qualities of an atom.

“There is one point of great interest in the formation of atoms that ought not to be omitted. The Life of the LOGOS is the whirling force within the atom, that holds its component parts together. This Life gives to the atom its distinctive quality, its essential nature, which is a particular mode of the divine Consciousness; the Hindu calls this the ‘Tattva’, literally the ‘Thatness’; ‘Tat’, ‘That’, is a reverent expression for the Divine Being, and Thatness indicates ‘Godness’ or ‘God-nature’. “
Theosophy by Annie Besant
http://www.theosophical.ca/TheosophyAB.htm

“Was Alice Bailey thinking different than the founders of Theosophy?”

--> Alice Bailey was originally in Theosophy, although later, she broke off and started her own area of study.

“Why doesn’t Theosophy discuss how to do magick? I think an adept is the embodiment of magick. Perhaps they don't admit or talk about their powers.”

--> Theosophy plays down the acquiring of psychic powers. (Magick is viewd the same as psychic powers.) You are right, in that an Adept is psychic. However, the acquiring of psychic powers before the person is ready is seen as putting the person into an imbalance. It is better to work on the fetters that Theosophy lists as our present tasks, and leave the acquiring of psychic powers to when our Master thinks we are ready.

~~~

Everyone else is welcome to join in, and give their answer to these questions.

Magick.

To me, that's something that's unusual, and unexplainable.

Set a boom-box down next to a bushman, turn it on, and you've just worked some magic(k). At least the bushman thinks so. Predict an eclipse. Find some water with divining rods. It's just like magic.
So what we do now that's no longer unusual, and is (somewhat) explainable, is no longer magic. It has become mundane. Or has it?

Isn't anything we do when we control and manipulate the forces and substances of nature, magic? If we study and practice, can't we develop skills (powers, siddhis) that appear unusual and unexplainable?

Did HPB and her Masters have siddhis? Yes. Were they unnatural? No. Were they unusual and unexplainable? Yes. Did they require training and study? Were they earned and deserved? Yes.

Now, what is the difference between Black Magic and White Magic, the left hand path and the right hand path? Motive. Selfish or selfless desire. What is important - the siddhis or the motives?

Hi everybody!

I wanted to add these graphics to my post above. This helps to show how everyone fits into one hierarchy.

From The Central Sun to Guardian-Spirits of Peoples and Nations

















As seen in the chart above, Each Hierarchy emanates from a single member of the Hierarchy above it, and each member of that Hierarchy puts down its own lower Hierarchy.

One discrepancy may be observed in the chart above. In that chart, the Jewish People may be misconstrued as being part of the Fourth Race. They are not, they are part of the Fifth Race.

There is a little controversy over the Central Sun. Some people say it refers to the Central Sun of the universe. However, it has also been said it only refers to the Central Sun of our galaxy. (People may have been unaware of galaxies in the 1800's, when the book containing this information was written.)

Jon

I think that it does. It involves two things; one, understanding the [forces] of nature, and two; using your developed consciousness to control these. Unfortunately, though, is that this is often coupled with the additional concept of "controlling" what was termed Elementals by H. S. Olcott, but to which he most likely meant Elementaries, in my opinion.

Psychic powers, or Sidhis in older Theosophical writings, are actually NOT a necessity for magick; although there has long been a confused understanding that this was so. Most likely, due to the "newness" of all of these concepts on Western civilization.

Nature Spirits, more correctly called Nature People as they themselves tell me, can do things which may be construed magickal to the uninitialted, but these things are not the "stuff" of physical mediumship which colored the early days of Theosophy. Theosophy itself was started under the premise that a society could bring about proofs of Nature Spirits consciousnes, but was withheld by then V.P. Felts, which precipited an near early dimise to the Theosophical Society.

Development of our consciousness, which resulted in the expression of Siddhis, was, as well, an early tenant of the Society. It was after so very many complaints, and supposed proofs of fraud, that the Society, and with some indications of support from the Masters, CHANGED directions, and developed a new concept of focus on personal develpment which did not include the focus or expectation of what would today be called psychic powers. Still, much of Theosophy points out that such latter development is a natural occurance, and will normally occur through the reincarnation process [when we are ready.] Such term would seem to be emerging as many persons show evidence of natural psychic abilities.

When consciousness is developed to the point of being able to traverse Planes, in our Astral and Mental faculties by way of example (but not limited to these), [things] can also happen, or be caused to happen that would seem magical to those unaware.

I have a book out on Nature Spirits, and have just released a second hardback on how to See and Sense them. Later in the year I have a new hardback on the Magick of Gnomes and Leprechauns coming out. I am a featured speaker and workshop lecturer where I teach people to see and experience them; again, an initial aim of the Theosophical Society. Theosophy has had a long standing call for persons adept at this communication and ability to come foreward.

Always keep in mind when reading the old references to psychic powers and mediumship, that such are references to, almost always, "physical mediumship." This rapping - tapping dark room seance stuff of Elementaries and Ectoplasm is most likely the least explored, desired and exhibited abilities by modern-day sensitives. The dangers are known, as are the actual limitations. It is as well known that Inspirational Mediumship produces the most meaningful, verifiable results. What many, however, do not know, is that much of the energy work, healing energy work that is, is actually a form of physical mediumship; to that end, this still exists.

Much of the things which would represent the forces of nature, and knowledge of it, can be apparent to the presumed non-psychic person. This is because there is something that happens to our minds growing up, and something has been happening to our eyes over eons, which have a tendency to block, what whould otherwise be a natural ability. Such difficulties are what I overcome in my workshops -- just to let you know that we tend to think are invisible beings, magic and invisible energies are actually of THE PHYSICAL WORLD, and therefore, are understandable, perceptible and employable by almost anyone.

In my opinion, what exactly the Masters are is somewhat subjective, they being far more closely associated with physical world man than might be being expressed. Again, my opinion, and I do try and follow this in all ways that I can. My work in Simhadi leads me to believe at the moment that [they] were persons operating at this level of consciousness, something obtainable by Man. Although, they may have obtained the ability to be in the permanent state, rather then the intermittent state general man can attain. Their form would likely be a reflection on intermittent abilities in their prior lives, and they would find permanency a natural state once they achieved adulthood in their last incarnation.

Books on the subject tend to connect "true Saints" to this level of consciousness. Also Jesus and other notables we are all familiar with. The New Age movements thinking and logic would group Saints, Jesus, Buddha into their "Ascended Masters" category. Theosophy would rather bring in hierarchies of consciousness, and certain worldly and mankind responsibilities which would differentiate the Ascended. Jesus, for example, would be a highly developed man, for sure, but with an predisposition to His inheritence, the Christ Consciousness. Buddha has his valuted place. The understanding of where the Masters [are], or what state they are in, does not seem to be definitive in Theosophy from my review.

Mediumship, especially the higher form of Inspirational Mediumship, seems to be the [practical] reflection on the development of consciousness that Theosophy [currently], or most recently, has adopted. Either way would lead to the perception of any form of the aforementioned consciousnesses, in accordance with our own Light ( our level of development,) in my opinion. It should be realized, as well, that our ability to raise our consciousness is only part of the equation of "contact." Some counterpart in deed, in fineness of consciousness, or by natural means through Laws must also ensue, and [part] of this would include a Will to do so -- something also alluded to in more recent Thesophical writings since the departure of the Masters.

I tried to touch on all the areas I thought you might be going Jon.


Dr. Christian von Lahr

Nick,

Your first Post at the top of this Thread was particularly good in my mind.

I would add to the latter part of it, that Magick was understood the be a result of knowledge of Natural Laws. The masses and unititated were held to be completly ignorant fo the laws, and therefore perceived natural things as magical. Such would be my opinion from what I have read on the subject.

The diagram is great as far as it is allowed to go. There would seem to be a very great disparity between a Central Sun of the Universe, and our own Galaxy, the Milky Way. This gap always concerns me as it tends to convey that the 'greate ancient explorations' expoused in Theosophy were in reality 'great thinking,' and Anthropromorphic at that, since their relativity is to Human earth-realted consciousness alone. The teachings have not, to my way of thinking, captured the necessary perpituity that would be requisite to accepting our teachings as pertaining to an understanding or awareness of an Absolute. Again, too man-centered. I have to take great leaps of faith when I encounter these shortfalls, when I would prefer not to.

Theosophy was meant to hold the promise of scientific, provable and experiential understanding of ALL things, even if it was by inference. I find that much of it just 'stops.' And, THIS is where I am hoping that modern man can make contributions; but, perhaps this is just faith as well. Logic demands that I realize that any and all explainations must, by virtue of the scope of their intent, be grossly inadequate. As man progresses, an science and technology, as well as our general better understanding of things, our philosophies MUST GROW to subsequently provide greater depth, or greater clairity or explaination. And, most certainly, greater experiential ability in order to provide 'spiritual' proofs. I am always concerned that Theosophy does not really have this tenant embraced, regardless that it was indeed put forth in the earlier years. Logically, we should all see that our prior knowledge, as great as it may be, will have to prove [inadequate] to support or growing understanding of the Order of the Universe and dimensions, and greater Spiritual awareness that is a natural result of our evolution.

It is a Good thread. I believe you are going in the right direction when you encourage people to THINK. It would seem to be stated throughout the literature almost subliminally, that our achievement of Higher Consciousness is a natural course TO FOLLOW our mental development; and, that such is both part-and-parcel to it, and relative to it.


Christian

Christian,

You said,

"In my opinion, what exactly the Masters are is somewhat subjective, they being far more closely associated with physical world man than might be being expressed. Again, my opinion, and I do try and follow this in all ways that I can. My work in Simhadi leads me to believe at the moment that [they] were persons operating at this level of consciousness, something obtainable by Man. Although, they may have obtained the ability to be in the permanent state, rather then the intermittent state general man can attain. Their form would likely be a reflection on intermittent abilities in their prior lives, and they would find permanency a natural state once they achieved adulthood in their last incarnation."

--> I am not sure what you are saying. Are you saying they are more human than we make them out to be? I think I remember reading somewhere they can be conscious on the physical level (like us), or on the Mental or Buddhi level -- but only on one plane at a time. I think they also do not lose a train of thought we they transfer their consciousness from the physical to astral plane (like us, when we fall asleep), but they keep they same train of thought uninterrrupted during the transfer. (We, of course, usually lose any train of thought, when we wake up in the morning, as we transfer from the astral plane back to the physical plane.)

I certainly agree that Theosophy is all about explaining unknown Natural laws. Blavatsky's constant talking about the seven principles of man is an example of this.

You brought up the subject of the gap between the Central Sun and our galaxy's Guardian-Spirit. Clearly, Theosophical literature leaves a big gap in this area. This is one area I have looked into a lot. However, as we know, Blavatsky intentionally left a lot of this out. Her reasoning was it is too much information, and we need to concentrate on the formation of the Earth and the various human races. But I share your fascination in what really goes on between our galaxy's Guardian-Spirit and higher levels.

"This gap always concerns me as it tends to convey that the 'greate ancient explorations' expoused in Theosophy were in reality 'great thinking,' and Anthropromorphic at that, since their relativity is to Human earth-realted consciousness alone."

--> You lost me. What are you trying to say?

"The teachings have not, to my way of thinking, captured the necessary perpituity that would be requisite to accepting our teachings as pertaining to an understanding or awareness of an Absolute."

--> On this, I feel, Blavatsky was quite clear. The human mind just cannot understand what the Absolute is. The finite cannot understand the infinite. That is why, in the Stanzas of Dzyan (especially Stanza i-1), Blavatsky can only describe what the Absolute is, by describing what it is not. Theosophy seems to be saying we should be understand, and be aware, that there is an Absolute. And that is it -- no more can be done. (This is the position I resigned myself to, long ago.)

"Theosophy was meant to hold the promise of scientific, provable and experiential understanding of ALL things, even if it was by inference."

--> Yes!

"I find that much of it just 'stops.' "

--> Yes, for two reasons. (1) There is only so much we can understand. Perhaps the Mahatmas are trying to give us only what we can understand. (2) Much the Ancient Wisdom is "classified secrets" and they cannot afford to entrust us with it. (I believe (2) is much more likely than (1)....) One of the fascinating things about reading Theosophical literature is to watch the history of ideas as they are released. I have seen several instances where an idea is not allowed to be given, then later, it is allowed to be given. We are making progress!

"As man progresses, in science and technology, as well as our general better understanding of things, our philosophies MUST GROW to subsequently provide greater depth, or greater clairity or explaination."

--> This is very promise of Theosophy -- that we are making progress, and that our understanding is continually increasing, until, at the end of the seventh Round, we will know everything there is to know about Natural Law. It is a day I am very much looking forward to.

"I am always concerned that Theosophy does not really have this tenant embraced, regardless that it was indeed put forth in the earlier years."

--> As I said, I feel this is due to (2), and will be removed when the time is ripe.

"Logically, we should all see that our prior knowledge, as great as it may be, will have to prove [inadequate] to support or growing understanding of the Order of the Universe and dimensions, and greater Spiritual awareness that is a natural result of our evolution."

--> ... And that is exactly what I feel will happen.

"I believe you are going in the right direction when you encourage people to THINK."

--> This is the very heart of the Theosophy ideal. I do not like organized religion because they frown on us asking too many questions. Theosophy, on the other hand, encourages questions. Let's go, folks, start asking more questions!

"It would seem to be stated throughout the literature almost subliminally, that our achievement of Higher Consciousness is a natural course TO FOLLOW our mental development; and, that such is both part-and-parcel to it, and relative to it."

--> As a matter of fact, I was just reading this quote today in the book The Divine Plan, by Geoffrey Barborka.

First, Barborka quotes from The Secret Doctrine.

“The Doctrine teaches that, in order to become a divine, fully conscious god, -- aye, even the highest -- the Spiritual primeval INTELLIGENCES must pass through the human stage. And when we say human, this does not apply merely to our terrestrial humanity, but to the mortals that inhabit any world, i.e., to those Intelligences that have reached the appropriate equilibrium between matter and spirit, as we have now, since the middle point of the Fourth Root Race of the Fourth Round was passed. Each Entity must have won for itself the right of becoming divine, through self-experience.”

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-1-06.htm

Barborka then comments.

[In order for Spiritual progress to happen,] “… Manas (man’s fifth principle) must be awakened, and man must learn how to function at will in his sixth principle, Buddhi. Prior to this, however, he must have learned how to function consciously in his Higher Manas (that is, Manas with the light of Buddhi). In other words, the present human phase of evolution stresses the presonality, which is so very apparent in man’s ordinary everyday life. This represents the Kama-Manas part of man’s constitution, in which Kama (the Desire-principle) dominates Manas (the Mind-principle) – also termed the Lower Manas…. This signifies becoming divine, through self-experience.”

P. 73
http://www.questbooks.net/title.cfm?bookid=70

My conclusion, then, is that everything will turn out just the way you have described it. Our achievement of Higher Consciousness will be is a natural course to follow, as we learn to set our animal desires aside, learn to use our brains, and eventually learn to use something even higher than our brains. This is the very essence of the Theosophical message.

Nick

By great ancient explorations I am referring to there being a basis for calling the ancient wisdom "Ancient Wisdom." That, they proved their wisdom by spiritually exploring their views over centuries. Further, Theosophy follows the concept and has tried to prove in scientific manner its philosophies on dimensions, spirit, and bodies -- Leadbeater will surely come to mind.

That they were in reality (my question, not a deduction) just "great thinking" is my reference to there being, perhaps, just a lot of learned mental deduction and theorizing going on instead.

The reason I included Anthropomorphic is that the conclusions pertain so very narrowly to current mankind, actually humankind, with such great indifference to the many forms of life here (some invisible), and the logical presumption of considerable life and/or consciousness out in the cosmos. Or, yet undisclosed dimensions.


When put all together in my oldstyle theosophical type of writing (an endless sentence,) LOL, the wisdom seems "too specific" to mankind. Therefore, is it "deduced" and theorized instead of being a result of scientic proof and exploration?


Thanks for asking.

Christian


PS: We can't have our Pilot getting lost :lol: Unless you happen to be reading this over the Bermuda Triangle. Then, it's just par for the course. What's one more occult mystery?

Nick,

Yes........ But, with some added detail, I am also saying there are levels of accomplishment available and possible for man right now. And further, that people are attaining this. I use this attained state in correlation to the Mahatma's apparent form of existence.

[B]Perhaps I should simply ask,[/B] are they functioning at a state of permanent Samahdi? Which, is something that many achieve in its temporary state, and that some Eastern Indians achieve permanently? All that is recorded seems, to my perspective, to be reflective of what is accomplishable in that state?

Nick,

... which is probably the one thing I love most about the old lady. The concept is wonderful and sound, and so foundational to all things Theosophical, and in its various permutations. It is the kind of philosphy that simply rings "TRUE," and is therefore easy for people to resonate with.

Christian

Nick,

But, we can understand more and more, either by knowing more of what the Absolute is, or isn't. Perhaps by comment should best be viewed "as a CALL." All people are not equal in understanding the Ancient Wisdom, even that withheld. People have advanced emensly so since the late 1800's too. Further, people CAN reach higher states now, and more people are so involved. There seems to be an arbitrary BOX that all must fit in for all time it would seem. Saying that sometime later more will come leaves one wondering if there really is any more information to be had. Further, "Information" was the old mode, "Experience" is a newer mode that has to be considered -- people are capable now, and in greater numbers, of experiencing things. This allows for far greater understanding than the written word.

Christian

If you say so. I have not known of later releases.

Nick,

The comment was more a compliment to you. I have read, and I think even in posts on this Board, that questioning is discouraged. I got the feeling, perhaps even read elsewhere something about "circling the wagons" and protecting Blavatsky and Theosopy by not asking questions.

Christian

Both logic and Theosophy states that hindered development hinders ALL of mankind. Therefore, why isn't there something akin to Natural Laws where we can make personal progress, and thereby contribute to the growth of Mankind's development. The current scheme seems more like "breeding." Further, it forces mankind to function at its lowest level. Also puzzling, is that the statement is incongruent with the existent of Masters, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, at the top, and many other especially enlightened souls. So, are we taliing about "Natural Selection" here, choice, or common evolution.

I do recall reading something about how even Buddha will be subject to the process of Rounds -- This seems illogical. Basically, everything would be "predestined" as a result.

Along this vein, "so how come the Mahatmas" have the sum total of the eventual Wisdom then?" They don't describe themselves as being beyond the accomplishment of Buddha, but yet, seem to incongruenetly hold the "Keys" to everyone's future.

Christian

:lol: Nick, you've just had your first New Age moment, ... it's called "Synchronicity."

Christian

To know what the Absolute is (or isn't), one must know the I AM. Gnothi se autom. Man, know thyself.

“If I have seen further [than certain other men] it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants”. (Isaac Newton)
Certainly we are standing on the shoulders of Isaac Newton (one of our greatest occultists) today. Even our decidedly materialistic and narrow-focused scientists today have come a long way since HPB’s day, and we should not discount these advancements because of their exotericism.

I have thought in terms of “knowledge horizons” for some time now. No matter how far you travel towards the horizon, it always advances in front of you. Like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, you never get there. But we still have advanced, and the fact that we shall never find the pot of gold (theory of everything?) does not negate the advancement. This applies to the mundane empirical discoveries of the scientists as well as the philosophical discoveries of the jnani.

There is a difference between the knowledge of something, and the “knowing” of something. The former is empirical, logical, intellectual and uncertain (information). The latter is intuitive, arupa, but certain (experience). The first of the head, the second of the heart.

If you were to study the Secret doctrine, memorizing its passages, you wouldn’t get it. I believe however that there are “keys” in the SD (and in the ML) that can help us unlock the Truth that’s already in our hearts. Help us to know, and also approach that horizon with our intellects, give form to the formless.

There are keys elsewhere as well, and we would be remiss if we did not search for them (with discrimination). The Masters may have gone silent with regards to the TS, but they are certainly at work in the world today, subtly guiding humanity. To “circle the wagons” as you put it, and take every jot and tittle of HPB’s words as Law would have her rolling over in her (allegorical) grave.

Humans have an arrogant, prideful way of looking at reality. We believe that what we perceive and experience with our five simple senses is an accurate representation of the world as it is. Our scientists disavow anything they cannot measure (although they admit the limitations of our senses).
We assume consciousness to be of the human kind. After all, we are the only sentient beings in the universe. If there were others, they would necessarily have to be like us in their physical nature and in consciousness. If they didn't perceive the world as we do, they would be wrong.

(And if we don't understand a thing, we should destroy the thing. "The Day the Earth Stood Still" - great movie.)

We're like fleas - proud of how high we can jump.

Jon,

You speak of us as a soul-group. Is that your complete assessment, that we have no individual distinctions? If so, I would agree one could collectively justify the arguments given thus far for the withholding of develoment information for mankind by the Masters.

Somehow, though, the idea that we are all merely sheep doesn't sit well with me. Why bother with individual Karmic Laws if we are not recognized for our individual accomplishment and development?

Did the great words of Jesus, as another example, always use the word "you" in a collective context? LOL, there goes the Personal God theory, yes?

I find a collective argument for or against the meaning behind the Mahatma decisions illogical. Individuality, and our spiritual accomplishments create the STEPS of the ladder for others to climb.

Why the seeding influence from other planets if they could not by so doing influence our evolution -- which would have to be on an individual basis for a very great time -- it's a matter of numbers?

Distinction has always been the catalyst for change, improvement and progress. Yet, some of the worlds greatest minds have existed centuries and eons in the past. We DO NOT progress in any homoginzed way. So, their greatness is a personal and individual accomplishment. Is their reward an eternal existence in Devachan simply inspiring newer human forms, but without hope for their own progression, ... as ultimately, they must wait for everyone to catch up? Then what, they start at ground zero at the exact state of mind as everyone else? Ergo, each Round is its own enclosed race, having no reflection, influence or impact on the future Rounds?

Will the great ones all rise to the level of their competence, then simply WAIT till humankind consciousness reaches a perfect state of equality? My, what a Master lesson in humility, huh???

Well, I suppose its all possible, but it forces me to review that whole fallen angel philosophy. We may as well have just stayed Angels.


Christian

Christian, I was speaking of mankind in general, as he is now, in this life-wave. None of us are at the same point in our development - some have pulled ahead and some have fallen behind. (I have read that the majority of us are behind where we should be in this round due to the tremendous karmic debt run up by those who chose the left hand path in the last subraces of the fourth root race.)
Remember that evolution/growth takes place on many different levels. There is physical evolution, spiritual evolution, and the evolution of manas or mind. Its hard to pigeonhole an individual as more or less evolved than the next.

Many of those who have pulled ahead of the average man do indeed create steps, and teach or guide the rest.

Waiting is not a big deal. Mind in incarnation develops a perspective on the passage of time that is not applicable to after death states.

"Satan" advising "Adam and Eve" to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge facilitated our awakening into sentience. Without the angels "falling" into generation, we would not be the self-reflective creatures we are today. Their sacrifice wil not go unrewarded however.

Christian,

You said,

“That they were in reality (my question, not a deduction) just ‘great thinking’ is my reference to there being, perhaps, just a lot of learned mental deduction and theorizing going on instead.”

--> I believe the Mahatmas, because they have already achieved Enlightment, have access to a great deal of information stored in some kind of cosmic library. That is why I think their teachings are much more than deductions and theorizings.

“The reason I included Anthropomorphic is that the conclusions pertain [to] humankind, with such great indifference to the many forms of life here (some invisible)….”

--> Unfortunately, Theosophy only teaches about humanity’s role on Earth, and what humanity needs to do. To cover all that you describe would take libraries full of books. Hopefully, someday, we will learn about all of the non-human kingdoms and beings existing along with us here on Earth.

“…the wisdom seems "too specific" to mankind. Therefore, is it "deduced" and theorized instead of being a result of scientic proof and exploration?”

--> This is the strength and weakness of Theosophy. Theosophical teachings were merely handed down, without any testing to see if they were true. Perhaps we can start doing that now. I know this is something you are very interested in.

“…there are levels of accomplishment available and possible for man right now. “

--> Theosophy teaches mainly about Arhatship, Enlightenment, and Nirvana. Feel free to tell us about other levels you are talking about.

“But, we can understand more and more, either by knowing more of what the Absolute is, or isn't.”

--> It is an interesting idea. I have sat through many Theosophical discussions where people try to better understand the Absolute. I does seem to me, however, that our job is more in understanding the previous level we came from, and the next level we are aiming for, instead of conceptualizing every possible level to and from the One Reality. Our job is more to undersand the next step, than to understand the entire ladder. (It would be impossible to understand the entire ladder anyway.)

“If you say so. I have not known of later releases.”

--> What I meant was, once in a while, it is said a particular teaching is not allowd to be given. Then, a later quote says the teaching is now allowed to be given. If I find an example, I will let you know.

“I got the feeling, perhaps even read elsewhere something about ‘circling the wagons’ and protecting Blavatsky and Theosopy by not asking questions.”

--> It is one of Theosophy’s strongest teachings that there is no dogma in Theosophy – no one has the right to tell someone else what to believe in any Theosophical meetings. However, I sometimes fiund myself saying things like “Theosophy teaches….” Or “Theosophical literature says….” With the idea that it is dogmatically correct. For example, reincarnation. The idea that reincarnation does not happen sounds very “anti-Theosophical”.

I must also say I have found a fair amount of intolerance in people on opposite sides of the Theosophical Schism

We must, therefore, be on constant guard to avoid making dogmatic statements and “circling the wagons”, even when we think it is justified. Theosophy encourages more questioning than any other pilosophy.

“…why isn't there something akin to Natural Laws where we can make personal progress…?”

--> We are making progress. It is only that we do not know all Natural Law yet. Thanks to Theosophy, we know more than other people.

“… ‘so how come the Mahatmas’ have the sum total of the eventual Wisdom then?"

--> Even the Mathatmas do not have all knowledge. (But they sure have a lot more than we do.) I remember Master M remarking in the Letters to A. P. Sinnett that their knowedge only extends to the limits of our solar system.

Thanks Nick. All good and useful replies. This last one I will have to ponder upon longer.

Christian