THAT which is ever awake even in sleep, sending forth the variety of ideas, is the Real Self, and all immortality; - all the worlds are held in it (as it were, in suspension), there is nothing which transcends it. It is this. As the one fire pervading the universe appears in so many forms in the variety of objects, so the Inner Self of all, ever one, appears to take on so many forms, but it is ever beyond them. As the sun who enlightens everything has nothing whatever to do with the numerous ills the eye may perceive, so the Inner Self of all, ever one, has no connection whatever with the joys and sorrows of the world, being ever beyond them.
He who pours water into the muddy well, does but disturb the mud.
You can discover the truth, whether it is the truth within yourself or the true nature and essence of anything in the universe, only through a condition in yourself, in which the mind ceases to invent out of its ignorance and becomes the servant of an Intelligence transcending the mind.
Hermes brings our intellectual endowments to light, fills everything with divine reason, moves our souls towards Nous, awakens us as it were from our heavy slumber, through our searching turns us back upon ourselves, through our birth pangs perfects us, and through the discovery of pure Nous leads us to the blessed life.
As you can see I've had a busy month. I've added quotes, articles and biographies. Most link-lists have been updated: checked and descriptions of the links added. In some cases I've also added several links. A whole section about the Internet, mostly for (myspace-) newbies, was created. For promotion purposes I've created Banners. The codes given automatically include links to my website. So those of you who have a website, or blog, or myspace account... If you think Katinka Hesselink Net is worth returning to, please consider linking to it as well.
My studies are going great and are once again very interesting. I'm taking some classes on the history of India, Indian art, Indian philosophy and general subjects like religious sociology and interpretation of religious texts.
To my sorrow I've learned of the passing of Dallas Tenbroeck, who was the public face of the United Lodge of Theosophists online, even if he did not want to be. See the obituary below.
Nicholas at theosophy-forum reports that Dallas Tenbroeck, tireless promoter of Blavatsky based theosophy on various e-mail lists, passed away on September 2nd 2006. He was a friend of B.P.Wadia's and central to the work of the United Lodge of Theosophists, though always keen to point out that he didn't speak for that group, but only for himself. Apparently he had fainted or had some kind of traumatic episode while at the computer. She called 911, and they took him to nearest hospital in Thousand Oaks. Shortly after arriving he seemed to be coming around and then "his eyes rolled up in his head and he stopped breathing". They called a "Code Blue" and the Code team tried to resuscitate him, which they could not do. This was about 9:00am.
Dallas Tenbroeck wrote several articles on the history of the United Lodge of Theosophists that he permitted me to share online.
It is not easy to say just what our friends or enemies really are, or to what extent they influence our lives, or in what manner we affect them. From one point of view, we do not choose either our friends or our enemies, for both of these must belong to the far past. We are but renewing our
past experience with them in this life. How else can we explain a sudden friendship that may last a lifetime, love at first sight - or that cautious feeling that creeps into our minds when we meet a person for the first time, even under the most auspicious circumstances? We want to hold back, yet we reason ourselves out of the idea at the time, only to find later on that first impressions are things to watch and study.
Our friends bring out the best in us, and the opposite is true also - our enemies bring out the worst in us. Why is this? In the presence of an enemy, our good nature can evaporate as though we were exposed to some powerful chemical that changes our mood. Somehow, our enemy is able to harm us, and it is we, ourselves, who provide the opportunity, even as we create the condition by which our friend may help us.
However, we must not lose sight of the fact that often our "enemy," by putting us on our mettle, arouses positive qualities which our friend may leave quite dormant, if our friendship is of a complacent nature. So both friend and enemy perform their dual functions in our growth. For this very reason, a true friend will sometimes appear unfriendly, or aloof, and thus rouse us to question a course of action we have mistakenly entered upon.
It is our feeling of separateness which binds us to our foes, even as our feeling of unity binds us to our friends. It is said, "to have a friend, we must be a friend," and so, also, to have an enemy is to be an enemy. All of which brings us back to our own doorstep, where it is hoped vie may find the real friend - the inner Counselor - on whom alone we may fully rely. With this attitude, we will be ready to venture out again among our so-called friends and enemies, and take up the battle with renewed courage to vanquish the real enemy in ourselves.
[This is the introduction of this essay - the source and rest of the article can be found through the link at the bottom of the article]
During the last century, and part of the one before, it was widely held that there was an unreconcilable conflict between knowledge and belief. The opinion prevailed among advanced minds that it was time that belief should be replaced increasingly by knowledge; belief that did not itself rest on knowledge was superstition, and as such had to be opposed. According to this conception, the sole function of education was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's education, must serve that end exclusively.
One will probably find but rarely, if at all, the rationalistic standpoint expressed in such crass form; for any sensible man would see at once how one-sided is such a statement of the position. But it is just as well to state a thesis starkly and nakedly, if one wants to clear up one's mind as to its nature.
It is true that convictions can best be supported with experience and clear thinking. On this point one must agree unreservedly with the extreme rationalist. The weak point of his conception is, however, this, that those convictions which are necessary and determinant for our conduct and judgments cannot be found solely along this solid scientific way.
For the scientific method can teach us nothing else beyond how facts are related to, and conditioned by, each other. The aspiration toward such objective knowledge belongs to the highest of which man is capable, and you will certainly not suspect me of wishing to belittle the achievements and the heroic efforts of man in this sphere. Yet it is equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations. Objective knowledge provides us with powerful instruments for the achievements of certain ends, but the ultimate goal itself and the longing to reach it must come from another source. And it is hardly necessary to argue for the view that our existence and our activity acquire meaning only by the setting up of such a goal and of corresponding values. The knowledge of truth as such is wonderful, but it is so little capable of acting as a guide that it cannot prove even the justification and the value of the aspiration toward that very knowledge of truth. Here we face, therefore, the limits of the purely rational conception of our existence.
But it must not be assumed that intelligent thinking can play no part in the formation of the goal and of ethical judgments. When someone realizes that for the achievement of an end certain means would be useful, the means itself becomes thereby an end. Intelligence makes clear to us the interrelation of means and ends. But mere thinking cannot give us a sense of the ultimate and fundamental ends. To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations, and to set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely the most important function which religion has to perform in the social life of man. And if one asks whence derives the authority of such fundamental ends, since they cannot be stated and justified merely by reason, one can only answer: they exist in a healthy society as powerful traditions, which act upon the conduct and aspirations and judgments of the individuals; they are there, that is, as something living, without its being necessary to find justification for their existence. They come into being not through demonstration but through revelation, through the medium of powerful personalities. One must not attempt to justify them, but rather to sense their nature simply and clearly.
You should also inquire why from childhood we are hurt psychologically. Most of us psychologically are wounded, and from that wound, whether one is conscious of it or not, many of our problems arise. The wound to a child is by a scolding, by saying something ugly, brutal, violent. When you say 'I am wounded' who is it that is wounded? Is it the image that you have built about yourself that is wounded - the psyche? Please, the speaker has not read any of the psychology books or philosophy or religious books, he's just investigating with you. The psyche is the 'me' - and the me is the image I have built about myself. There is nothing spiritual about it. That's another ugly word - spiritual. So that image gets hurt and we carry that image right through our life. If one image is not pleasant, we put together another image which is pleasant, encourage it - it is worthwhile, significant, giving intellectual meaning to our life.
Is it possible to live on this earth not having a single image, about anybody, including god, - if there is such an entity - no image about your wife and your children and your husband, and so on? Not to have a single image? Then it is possible never to be hurt.(*) Title by the editor of Lucifer7
The writer once addressed a ... question to Mme. Blavatsky, asking her why, since it was the law that we have to pass through material existence, we should have to suffer so in getting out of it. "Well," she said, "we should not have had all this pain and suffering if we had not bound ourselves in chains when on the road. If part of one's journey lies through a boggy swamp, it is bad policy to stop and sit down in the mud. But this is just what we have done. We might have walked through on stilts."
Previous issues of Lucifer7 can be found at the online index of Lucifer7
If you appreciate the content of this newsletter, please consider donating to Katinka Hesselink