General Theosophy #95

“A thing even Theosophers may not fully understand about Real Magic, as contrasted with the fairy-tale-grade magic of literature and movies, is that it may not actually be possible to willfully produce predictable, specific results; however, it may indeed be possible to meditatively create, in advance, general or at least “less differentiated” psychological states or “flavors” which, although reversing the usual cause-and-effect order within the “Matter-Spirit Continuum of Substance,” must nonetheless still be offset or “re-balanced” by specific, “qualitatively consonant,” yet entirely unpredictable, material events or circumstances appearing later.”—General Theosophy

3 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of Theosophy.Net to add comments!

Join Theosophy.Net

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 27, 2012 at 11:12pm: [sic]

Change "Spirit (the highest differentiation of matter)" to "Spirit (the least differentiated and most subtle form of matter)"

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 27, 2012 at 7:28pm: Greetings and good wishes, Emmanuel. I bet I could find a way agree with everything you write; nevertheless . . .

Re: [“We might wish to consider that Man and the Universe consist of two components: the spiritual and the physical.”]

Here, let me speak “authoritatively,” although as one Theosopher to another, we may both know that even authentic Theosophy may never really quite break through the barrier which separates “Strong-Strong-Strong Intuitive Inkling” from “Irrefragable Certainty.”

In any case, Spirit can sometimes be usefully defined as “Undifferentiated Matter.”

Psychologically speaking, furthermore, Spirit can sometimes be a useful word to describe the “content-dissolving” which begins at the Sixth (Spirit-Mental, Buddhi-Manas) Level of consciousness (one of the several types of consciousnesses which a person may “utilize” or “egoically transform into”.) Beyond the Sixth, of course, everything theoretically becomes entirely Atma-Buddhic (Undifferentiated Consciousness—Self, Purusa, Undifferentiated “I,” etc.—merging with Undifferentiated Substance—Prakriti, Undifferentiated “You,” etc.).

In the Yoga and Sankhya (really well presented in Richard Smoley’s book) philosophies it is sometimes explained that Consciousness (Self) and Spirit (the highest differentiation of matter) have such a similar “ultra-rarefied” nature that a “interpenetration” is possible and that this is the basis for the succession of troublesome, “psychological contaminations” or potential semi-Self, egoic delusions like animating (pranic or energy awareness), physical (body consciousness and other sensations), desire-feeling (emotional), desire-mental (like/dislike-tainted thought or cerebral manipulation), mental (dispassionate, objective thought etc.), and Spirit-mental (“intuitions”) which have become possibilities because of evolution—probably Darwinian—of the human being to its present condition of physical development.

So . . . please just regard the foregoing as a possible further “expansion” of your “two-component” sentence above.

Moderator Comment by John on December 26, 2012 at 1:05pm: Hmmm.

I can answer the causality question from the Physics viewpoint. This view involves matter at its most subtle level where words are not found, only mathematical memes. So, it involves information of possible correlations and coincidences where gross matter (events/effects) may be materialized. That is where I was headed.

I seem to have precipitated a few more questions...

Richard - "Is There a Future for You?" In my view organized Theosophy has long been too much sweepingly cosmological and too little helpfully psychological— ... "

I agree. What was started as Theosophy, personal/individual experiential focused, became entrenched into a specific and elaborate esoteric school of cosmosophy sold as theosophy. The cosmosophy/esotericism is an argumentative rabbit hole, leading away from the individual. (that statement should be considered an opinion -- contrary arguments are out-of-scope here <g>). Psychological is tough.

I need to limit the scope here. I almost feel that the the questions come down to "what is the meaning of life?"

Give me a bit of time to self-organize...

Comment by Capt. Anand Kumar on December 25, 2012 at 7:57pm: Thank You John and Richard for the beautiful comments.

Let us discuss it here. My personal preference would be for "Is there a future" rather than "Is there a future for you".

Richard, we really look forward to your review of Smoley's book. Please consider posting it. What if consciousness did not create universe but was created for it?

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 25, 2012 at 12:32pm: Anand and John, I would be interested in the “answer,” of course. However, perhaps a more pertinent, less generally philosophical, more specifically Theosophical re-phrasing of the question might be "Is There a Future for You?" In my view organized Theosophy has long been too much sweepingly cosmological and too little helpfully psychological—including the all-important consideration of whether or not anything of the terrestrial “Psyche-package” is able to pass from one lifetime to the next. (My own Theosophical “inkling” about this, agreeing with Gurdjieff and perhaps H.P.B as well, is “Yes . . . but not everyone . . . and not by any means. . . .”)

Anyway and incidentally, also in my view the most valuable Theosophical book to come along since THE SECRET DOCTRINE may well be Richard Smoley’s THE DICE GAME OF SHIVA: How Consciousness Creates the Universe. However, even this extremely impressive work might have attracted more attention if the direction had been shifted more-so from what-is-going-on-with-the-universe to what-is-going-on-with-you. Indeed, I almost considered writing a book review and giving it the title “THE DICE GAME OF SHIVA: How Consciousness Creates Richard Smoley.". . .

Moderator Comment by John on December 25, 2012 at 2:34am: Anand - Probably take this question to "Is There a Future" ? Or, we can answer it here.

preference?

Comment by Capt. Anand Kumar on December 24, 2012 at 9:36pm: Perhaps one could say: you likely get the event you want today, but tomorrow's event must balance it out in an undetermined way. Things get conserved in a rather bizarre way.

Indeed. Thank You John. But several questions arise. If causality within time is reversible (or changeable) then how does it affect the standard cause and consequence based theory of karma? Is there a super-causality independent of time?

We did try to discuss this earlier in the year. Is There a Future?

Comment by Richard Ihle on December 24, 2012 at 10:00am: What an interesting and insightful comment, John (and yours as well, Emmanuel). For many decades I have suspected that you might indeed be one of the rare, pioneering “S-R 6” (Sixth Degree of Self-Realization) individuals in the great, possibly translifetime, “adventure” of Psycho-Spiritual development.

Anyway, this last sentence of yours is golden: “Perhaps one could say: you likely get the event you want today, but tomorrow's event must balance it out in an undetermined way. Things get conserved in a rather bizarre way.”

(Remembering that the initial “analogical basis” for any valid Theosophical system-building is likely a job for esoteric psychologists, not scientific physicists,) when “Undifferentiated Substance” (Prakriti) becomes differentiated (in human beings, probably by common Darwinian evolution) into its animating, physical, desire-feeling, desire-mental, mental, Spirit-mental (Buddhi-manas) components, balance may be the underappreciated “operating principle” of the resulting conglomerate.

Thus, Gandhi could have been sharing a secret of Real Magic when he said this: “The recitation of Rama's name for spiritual ailments is as old as the hills. My claim is that the recitation of Rama's name is a sovereign remedy for our physical ailments also. To take Rama's name from the heart means deriving help from an incomparable power [‘greater than the atomic bomb,’ Gandhi said elsewhere].”

“Ram, Ram, Ram . . .” silently repeated over and over (perhaps especially while in Spirit-mental—Sixth Level— consciousness) may likely be an “excess” which just begs for re-balancing, even, perhaps, by the inexplicable appearance of material circumstances carrying some sort of psychological significance. . . .

Moderator Comment by John on December 23, 2012 at 8:43pm: I have been looking at a paper (ok, it is a QM/physics thing) that expresses a temporally-entangled material pair in which the initial material event and the future material event are coupled. It actually appears that the future event determines the past/previous event. This occurs because the system is less differentiated, i.e. has unresolved wave-particle duality, until the second material event occurs. Another way to say it is even after the first event -- the whole system is still a wave and a particle until the second event. (usually the measurement itself makes the decision if you saw a wave vs. a particle).

It is pretty strange in that the causality within time is both "reversed" and also the first event, after it has occurred, yields no (useable) information to predict the second event.

I like this one. It stretches the physics, but physics does not automatically disallow it. Rather very similar.

Perhaps one could say: you likely get the event you want today, but tomorrow's event must balance it out in an undetermined way. Things get conserved in a rather bizarre way.