Reframing theosophies (Neo-Platonism, Boehme, Blavatsky, etc.): some postulates

In order to make the archaic wisdom more understandable and up to date with 21st century state of affairs, I have reframed some old ideas of several theosophies into a modern form, a process-theosophy.
Here goes:

Some principles for a holistic philosophy of life

1. We live in an energy world. Matter is convertible to energy. Thoughts are energy-patterns. Feelings are energy-patterns. Action is of an energetic nature. Consciousness is substantive energy. And so on. Life is a process within this energy world.

2. There are interactions between organisms and their environment (other organisms and entities). The coupling between organism and environment gives rise to feedback-loops (mutual influences). Organisms are learning, developing, systems. Flows and cycles are a natural and ubiquitous phenomenon. In ancient philosophy and religion, this feedback is sometimes called karma (action and reaction, also working on the moral level of being). Experience and perception are central to life. Self-organization, autopoiesis (“self-making”) and adaptivity are core features of organisms.

3. Organisms are composite, complex systems. There is a control-hierarchy to steer processes within the organism, as well as between an organism and its environment. An example of a theory that deals with control and viable systems, is the management cybernetics of Stafford Beer.

4. All entities have their unique, substantive pattern, based upon which they manifest, develop, grow, and die. This pattern, or archetype, or paradigma, is the basis of inner identity (self), autonomy, sense of freedom and sense of morality. The expression of all this in the world is influenced by the environment. There is inherent unpredictability in the natural world. Since there is free will and choice, the outcome of actions cannot be predicted precisely. This has led the philosopher J.G. Bennett to introduce the concept of hazard.

5. Evolution is the process of gradual development (unfolding) of capabilities latent within each being. There are multiple evolutions (physical, mental, spiritual) going on. Kingdoms of nature show jumps in qualities developed. This is related to the foregoing postulates. Adaptivity is a core notion that can bridge the perceived gap between science and spirituality.

6. Manifestation is based on the principle of polarity.

The regulative consciousness-principle works through associated flows of energy-matter and associated configurations of energy-matter.

Some examples are: psychosomatic diseases; light-matter coupling (boson-fermion); male-female attraction; electromagnetism; antagonisms, as in how muscles work; complementarity; particle-wave duality; opening a tap to fill a glass with water. The “pairs of opposites” is a familiar notion in the Bhagavad Gita.

7. There is a unified “field” or "matrix" of substantive consciousness, from which emerges 'wave-particles' of consciousness-energy-matter, variously called life-atoms, monads, souls, etc., that share in the properties of this field, in their own appropriate way, by having their own, limited, characteristic pattern or “energetic signature”. This “field” is the basis for connectedness and interaction.

0 members like this

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bill Keidan on December 4, 2010 at 7:45pm

Well said, Martin. I believe that in any case one will be blocked from the highest knowledge and insights unless one has committed to the Bodhisattva Ideal (Buddhist or not). I think this is a lesson in maturity that many aspirants need to learn - all these systems that promise the earth: Kundalini yoga, Ritual Magic, Transpersonal Psychology - you name it - they are not worth a dead cent unless one's motive is pure and one's life is spotless. If we could look at the lives of those who had the highest insight we would see that the central core was to co-operate in The Great Plan. Those heroes who remain in the racial memory, in some cases after many centuries, invariably were of this type.

Permalink Reply by Bill Keidan on January 4, 2011 at 12:57pm

Yes, Robert of course that is true -Theosophy is not identical with Theosophical teachings. That is because everything tends to get tainted by passing through human hands. Nevertheless, I would say that there is a good measure of Theosophy in Theosophical Teachings and the nearer the theosophical teacher is to adeptship, liberation or the highest states of God-realization the more he/she is likely to represent the Theosophia in his/her life and teachings. Because perfect conduits are rarely available amongst those who are yet human, the Adept Brotherhood are forced to use imperfect messengers, who sometimes make mistakes. Again, even so, it is worth listening to what these people say and taking out of it what rings true to you. My own opinion about evaluating Theosophy in terms of modern science and also contemporaneous philosophy is that these disciplines are often less mature than the theosophical teachings that they attempt to critique, which is all part of a pathetic dumbing down of Theosophy to fit in with the reduced values of the age in which we live. However, I certainly subscribe to Geoffrey Hodson's view of evaluating the information that comes to us from occult or yogic investigations in terms of the scientific method. But, I see the yogi or the occultist as the best person to do this, not some scientist or philosopher, who may have a terrific intellect, but little in the way of interior realization or perhaps has been studying their own discipline to the extent that they really don't understand the length and breadth of Theosophy.

Permalink Reply by Ferran Sanz Orriols on January 5, 2011 at 5:15pm

Hi, friends!!!

Due to life circumstances I cannot spend as time as I wish in this nice website... I am happy to see that this thread has grown!!!

I think that wisdom has more to do with awareness than with knowledge, these are my two cents.

Blessings from the Heart to everyone!!!

Permalink Reply by Martin Euser on January 5, 2011 at 6:02pm

Robert>Up to date with 21st century! Should I describe as an update is. Which update needs the Theosophical movement? This is an important question.

Indeed. My take on this is that the core ideas will probably stand, but fringe ideas must be cut away, like Leadbeater's take on the rootraces. Any "absolutism" must be scrutinized, like the rest of the theosophical material. You seem to suppose that Blavatsky, Besant, Leadbeater and other early teachers spoke from infallible inspiration. That is questionable, but I will not pursue this thought here further. It may be better pursued in a separate setting.

Robert>A member of the forum wrote:
“I'm sorry to say that these 7 points seem to me too complicated to be useful to people without a certain background,…”

Irrelevant to this discussion.

Robert>In Martin's Introduction (No. 1 - 7), many scientific concepts are included. Bring us the progress on the path to initiation?

Irrelevant to the goal I had in mind: building bridges between theosophy and modern science (as poor as the latter has developed holistic concepts).

Robert>Scientific concepts are developed -
scientific concepts pass away.

Theosophical teachings involve concepts too. Ideas are expressed in language and become concepts in the mind of the reader. Also, language has its limitations.

Robert>Theosophical teachings live by the Theosophical light. Without this light, the Theosophical teachings are just concepts - they arise and pass away.

Of course, but one must have this light working in one's mind. Too many theosophists suppose that studying a few (or a lot of) books will bring this light. What really brings this light is applying the teachings to one's daily life.

Many of these theosophists also suppose that the Secret Doctrine is a kind of Bible of occultism. That's not the right attitude, as the three objects of the TS show.

Critical research is necessary of all theosophical teaching. A little hint: G. de Purucker already modernized some of the teachings of Blavatsky, to more clearly point out the relativity of all things, the evolution of all beings, than HPB had done.

Others have been working diligently after world war 2 to develop and reframe theosophical ideas further. I have mentioned some of them in the Service Projects forum. It is likely that I and maybe others will be posting some clarification of what this website, and theosopher.net is all about. The idea of synthesis may be new to some theosophists. It is not something final. The human race develops, new scientific findings and philosophical ideas and memes may provide opportunities for a fresh synthesis. With these words I will close this thread.

Permalink Reply by Bill Keidan on January 5, 2011 at 12:07am

Robert, there are a lot of points in your reply which indicate that you have really perceived the issues and challenges that are before humanity at this time, this is an important period in your own evolution when opinion actually starts to represent perennial truth insofar as words can do so. To go from the rupa to the arupa worlds admittedly is the ideal. Why do you think we do not find many who have done it, whether they be Theosophists or anyone else? It is because we need the help of A Master of the Wisdom to do it and those who proudly ignore and stand aside from this requirement, or just pay lip service to it, are not helping themselves or others whom they indoctrinate with their false ideas that we can go it alone. How do we know that this is the case? Well, look at the emphasis that H.P.B. gave to her Masters and the work she did to increase their profile in the eyes of a cruel world. Of more recent import is the statement of Geoffrey Hodson who left us this gem of a legacy from one of his own Masters, which as a matter of interest also incorporates your point about the rupa and the arupa worlds:

“28 September 1975 Auckland
Master Polidorus Isurenus
When a student and practitioner of yoga reaches the required state of advancement, he always comes under the direction of a Guru. The Guru-chela tradition and practice correspond very closely to the Mystery System. In fact, apart from some differences of method, they are identical. Every yogi who has attained a certain degree of renunciation, self-purification, and at least the beginnings of Causal consciousness, comes under a Guru.
He or she is then taught and very secretly and privately submitted to an Initiation. This means that the Guru – himself an Initiate – does actually perform a ceremony upon the chela. Every successful Yogi – from Shri Shankaracharya through Kabir and on to Yogananda and RamaKrishna – passed through the yogic form of Initiation. In this Fifth Race period no one can break through from the rupa into the arupa worlds without help.”
Light of the Sanctuary – The Occult Diary of Geoffrey Hodson pp269-270

Also, I totally agree with your ideas on Brotherhood and those who intone the mantra most consistently are often the ones who are most in breach of it. I have seen some very unbrotherly behaviour within the T.S. from people who should know a lot better. Fortunately, I have also seen some magnificent exemplars of it, for example in the persons of John Coats and Geoffrey Hodson and ironically not just these leaders of ideas in the movement, but in the case of many ordinary members who manifest the quality that those who seek and maintain power for the wrong reasons can never effectively produce. From this point of view true Brotherhood is like an alchemical test, which shows that we are intuiting the higher Theosophy from the inner worlds (that you refer to). I don't know what your own background is Robert, but it has certainly brought you very accurately to this important jumping off point.