BODIES AND ASTRAL LIGHT

Can a good, devout, pious member of a cult make progress towards enlightenment? I say yes.

O, absolutely, although I've had to think this through lately. "Cults" are those things that take ahold of you and refuse to let you go, hence mind control by and large. But can, for instance Hare Krsna's or even Mormons make spiritual progress. Absolutely YES! It seems like a hard way to go, when pure Theosophy is available (via "The Secret Doctrine"), however.

There are a lot of people out there who have strong emotional needs. Cults take advantage of their weaknesses and tendency to be dependent. Theosophy does not provide these things in a direct manner. So, unfortunately, such needy people are automatically attracted to cults.

I remember once talking to a policeman who was a gang specialist. He told me that young kids join gangs because they get from the gans what they don't get at home -- compliments when they do good things, and a general sense of emotioal support. Fortunately, Theosophy says the day will come when people no longer have such unfuifilled emotional needs.

I would be interested in hearing about Theosophy's view of the future of mankind. What did you mean? Are you referring to the "powers latent in man[kind]"? Will those change human nature in any way?

I've been working with a class using a book (TPH) by Sri Madhava Ashish "Man, Son of Man". It is a commentary on the Stanzas in the second volume of the SD.
Ashish abreviates the Theosophical anthropology considerably (Cosmogenesis lite?), but does a great job presenting the idea that man must now act as co-creator in his future evolution.

Well worth a read. (btw there was a prior commentary on the first volume of the SD by Ashish and his teacher Sri Krishna Prem "Man, the Measure of all Things")

Jon

"I would be interested in hearing about Theosophy's view of the future of mankind."

--> Theosophy says that the future of humanity is very bright. Theosophy predicts great success at our reaching the next step along our paths.

"Are you referring to the 'powers latent in man[kind]'? Will those change human nature in any way?"

--> I think you are refering to the idea that the day will come when people no longer have unfulfilled emotional needs. I would not say it it referring to latent "powers," as much as it is referring to unrealized potential that each and everyone of us has within ourselves. One of my endeavors is to study how people are trapped by negative emotions that they have been dragging around with them since they were children. I am committed to helping people see that they are doing this, and teaching them how to release themselves from such unnecessary hardships.

I believe that the powers latent in man refers to things like astral consciousness, buddhic consciousness, etc. These, too, shall be fully develped within all of us someday. I am very much looking forward to that day.

As to freeing people from childhood hangups, you have set yourself no easy task! As I recall, Dianetics also tries to do this by the use of e-meters and auditing. Do you have some special way to achieve this goal? I am NOT making fun of you, I'm very serious. The baggage of my childhood hangups had to wait on my age to catch up with me, in my case, and then they just sort of fell away. Having a great wife who understood me, or tried to, helped too. My studies of Stoicism, and especially Seneca, to mention one of my literary mentors again, helped as well. But, just as much, Theosophy helped me too in that I achieved a sort of wisdom with age that has sustained me when I felt let down or anxious. Childhood "ghosts" don't go away easily, but they do, at least in my case, go away. It's good to be free of old demons, no matter whether they are called "engrams" or something else. BTW, I am NOT a Scientologoist or Dianeticist, although I am familiar with their books. If reincarnation has any validity, I hope my next incarnation is better for my experience in this one.

Andrew,

I have been exploring the way childhood hangups cause us to be needy as adults. It is a fascinating study. I hope to put all of my ideas together into a book one day.

The one thing I have been zeroing in on is feeling and displaying inappropriate emotions. Some people get too emotional. Some people get mad too easily. Some some people don't express enough anger (stoics). Some people are terribly shy. The first step is for us to observe inappropriate emotions in ourselves and others. What do you see in yourself and the people around you?

While I would beg to differ with you on Stoics (of which I count myself one, and I have a hell of a temper---LOL), I agree that unattended emotional life tends to spoil all life. An emotional response that is not appropriate is certainly something that spoils the quality of life, as well as makes others misunderstand you. If you have the supreme solution to this problem, I encourage you to share all you have with the rest of us, even though your thoughts may not be complete at this point. I've read several books on cultish and antisocial behavior, and these qualities (?) are certainly not pretty to have or to be around. One bad habit I have had in the past, but not so much anymore, is being Passive-Aggressive. This drives everyone around you to desperation. It shuts the person up within oneself, and makes others have to guess at your intentions. Thank god I am defeating this trait in my character. Actually, aggression is easier to deal with than passive-aggression. I know this from my own past behaviors and from encountering others with this problem. You can deal with aggression, but passive-aggression just baffles you when you enounter it. Something that Stoicism has taught me to do is to be indifferent (cf. the "High Indifference" of Dr. John C. Lily) to those things that you really have no control over. This stops a lot of useless worry. Please share any secrets you may have learned in dealing with inappropriate emotions, as I am sure that I, for one, could use the advice.

Andrew,

I can see I need to give a definiton of stoic in the psychological sense. Stoic people have emotions just like anyone else, but they do not express them. There are many reasons for this, but I will not go into that now. But the result is that stoic people end up with a lot of pent-up emotions stored inside them that need to be released. I recommend everyone watch this movie about a stoic man and a stoic woman.

Tender Mercies (1983) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086423

You said, "...Stoics (of which I count myself one, and I have a hell of a temper...."

--> That is exactly my point. Stoics can have a lot of anger, etc., they just don't display it. (I have also noticed that stoic people think the only emotion that it is appropriate for them to display is anger. Would you agree?)

"...I agree that unattended emotional life tends to spoil all life."

--> By unattended you mean not expressed or expressed too much?

"One bad habit I have had in the past, but not so much anymore, is being Passive-Aggressive. This drives everyone around you to desperation. It shuts the person up within oneself, and makes others have to guess at your intentions."

--> I agree. One of our tasks with our stoic friends and romantic partners is to get them to express their anger in more appropriate ways. In addition, there are good ways and bad ways to complain about things, and most people have no idea how to differentiate between the two. If we need to complain, we should complain. (Stoics make a mistake and try to never complain.) The trick is to complain, but keep it to five sentences or less. Say what you need to say, and get it over with. Stoics never complain (and bottle it up inside them). Other complain too much. The trick is to keep a happy medium. Also, we should say what happened and how we feel about it. "I'm mad.... I have to go into work early on Monday. It's not fair." There it is, short sweet, a statment of what happened and how the person feels about it. Yes, it is true that people usually do not want to hear us complain, but we have to do it once in a while. My Short And Sweet technique is the way to go.

"Thank god I am defeating this trait in my character."

--> Good for you!

"Something that Stoicism has taught me to do is to be indifferent (cf. the "High Indifference" of Dr. John C. Lily) to those things that you really have no control over."

--> But we can still express our frustrations to people that are important to us. There is a difference between being indifferent and supressing important feelings. Some emotions need to be just let go, while others need to be dealt with. We need to learn to spot the difference.

"Please share any secrets you may have learned in dealing with inappropriate emotions, as I am sure that I, for one, could use the advice."

--> I could write a book on this. (As a matter of fact, I am.) I guess the first step is to become aware of emotions that we do NOT express. In the movie cited above, the man sees his daughter for the first time in ten years, yet he expresses absolutely no emotions at all when he sees her. Learning to spot this is the first step.

Excellent answer! I just have to agree even though my Stoic composure dictates otherwise. I guess I am not a very staunch Stoic, only a philosophical one. I do express love when it is appropriate, often and deeply, especially to my wife and my grandchildren. However Stoicism has saved me from some calamitious fits of anger! Relationships are very hard, to say the least. If I am finding wisdom as I grow older, it is no doubt due to grace of Lord Krishna, and not to my own abilities. While I am a "puppy" these days, it has not always been so! Even my cat, Garfield, whom I torment playfully incessantly, can attest to that---and often does, and I have to scars to prove it! LOL

Concerning my "Seriously" Post, I can only speak as an old soldier (kstriya) and express my dismay at the ignorance of men. Surely one suicide would have been better than a mass-murder! I don't, however, attribute this to Islam any more than I do general crime in Christian countries to Christianity. Again, "relationships are hard, to say the [very] least." This incident was certainly---and I simplify and understate it---a case of an inappropriate emotion. I feel hard at the man who did the shooting, but I also feel pity. He, if he lives, and his family---and probably all Muslims---will sting from this for a very long time. Reading the Bhagavag-Gita again and learning from the Master, Krishna, helps me to resolve this in my own mind. Krishna, Arjuna, and for that matter, the Buddha, were all kstriyas (of the warrior caste). So was the shooter and his victims. Arjuna acquited himself well with the Lord Krishna's guidance. The shooter did not.

Andrew,

I think everyone should be familiar with the four-step Assertive Training model.

1. Say the facts: You didn’t take out the garbage.
2. Describe your feeling: I’m mad at you.
3. Make an "I want" statement: I want you to take out the garbage.
4. Ultimatum: If you don’t take out the garbage I’m going to….
(It is recommended to give ultimatums as sparingly as possible.)

I have put together what I call Emotional Assertiveness Training. I merely switch the first two sentences, with a pause in between.

I’m mad at you…. You didn’t take out the garbage.

Stoic people, introverted people, etc., need to practice this kind of Emotional Assertiveness Training.

“Even my cat, Garfield, whom I torment playfully incessantly, can attest to that---and often does, and I have to scars to prove it! LOL”

--> Just be sure you are not making any bad karma.

“Surely one suicide would have been better than a mass-murder! I don't, however, attribute this to Islam any more than I do general crime in Christian countries to Christianity.”

--> I think you are referring to the recent shooting at Ft. Hood. I think he did it because he has lost control of his emotions. I think that if all of us can learn to deal with our emotions appropriately, these kinds of shootings will stop.

“I feel hard at the man who did the shooting, but I also feel pity.”

--> I, too, have learned to feel more compassion towards such kinds of people. He now has a lot of bad karma that he has to burn, and we will now have to “waste” a lot of time in future incarnations just to burn off this new bad karma.

I knew some Mormons, and they are pretty decent. I think it is amusing concerning the feds and resistance to polygamy. Their reasoning for not accepting Mormon polygamy is that the Husband would be too broke to pay taxes! heheheh

Another point being made concerning the U-238 chart, is that Uranium Lead is 206 atomic weight, regular Lead is slightly above 207, and Thorium Lead is 208. Bringing attention to this, is for showing the different characteristics, or making the point that there does exist distinction among all living things. Fortuna Non Omnibus Aeque. Fate is not the same for All.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am NOT saying that the Mormons are morally flawed or unfriendly people or anything of the sort. I, having been a Temple Mormon myself for a time, disagree with the cultish religion that they profess. Can they achieve high spiritual standing, even in the cult? Yes, and again, yes! I happen to disagree with many "corporate" religions on the basis of their "corporateness" alone, and not upon their adherents (Scientology is another example.). I have, for instance, many friends in the much-maligned Jehovah's Witnesses and the Scientologists, but their religion does not interfere with my personal life the way the cultish Mormons do. The Mormons keep trying to proselytize me even after I have voiced my desire not to be contacted, and have for years. They want me to "save up" my tithes during the time of my apostacy and turn them in when I, if ever, return. I just can't seem to get rid of their overtures. That is just not normal behavior, IMO. Nice people? Yes. But radically brainwashed? Yes, also!

Also just what is "depleted uranium" and why are we speading it all over the world with our wars? This hardly seems like a "green" thing to be doing!

The only dogmatic religions I would have an interest, if wanting to be a part of a fellowship for the sake of being among others with a common base, would be the Roman Catholics, or Judaism. I understand through Theosophy, that Buddhism, and the Sanskrit Teachings, along with Egyptian possibly, have the least amount of degradation and distortion. Although I feel Theosophy admits enough content exists within all of them to reach an agreement upon something once existing which was comprehensive to a point we could only imagine. I think. This is why I come to understand Theosophy as hinting this often; the existence once of a whole, or more complete, an understanding based upon humanity possessing less density of substantial make-up of their upadhi, stula sarira, physical body. I sort of understand this mitigates isolation from higher parts of an individual. Thus, far seeing.

Back to the reason for saying I would be Roman Catholic or Jewish, is simply because in this current form, the Tibetan, Sanskrit, and Egyptian is far removed from my upbringing in this life.

I don't know why we make over six billion people and then wonder at the trash we leave all over the globe. I ain't gonna fix it. I only brought up the U-238 to understand how the process of decay is one proof pointing out the death of the physical body is precisely that, only the death of the physical body. I also pointed out that ordinary Lead, U-238 Lead, and Thorium Lead, are for every and all intents and purposes, exactly the same thing, including chemical properties and ordinary processes of analysis being utilized, they are Lead, that simple. Yet, they have different atomic weights. I like growth and maturity being utilized to understand we should be careful in our industrial use toward keeping everyone fed and clothed, etc., and so forth. Jumping on a soap box about it is your political power hungry hordes. We have naturally occurring radium all over Northern Virginia poisoning the atmosphere in countless homes, requiring special ventilation plumbing to counter this threat, but we don't hear outcries about it. There is no one to blame it on but Nature.