Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Discussion on literature other than by the Star of Azazel.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Nefastos » Tue May 21, 2019 12:39 pm

A little interlude about the principles for those who might be interested, or for the later reference – for these things will certainly turn up as the project unfolds.
Smaragd wrote:
Mon May 20, 2019 9:22 pm
Some of these words are easier to wrap ones head around when we see them as a part of some larger structure. Manas for example is part of the Theosophical principles. Fra Nefastos has written an article series including these principles in a composition of human and presenting them in a bit different order. I'm hoping we could soon get it visible to the English article page.


I try not to confuse the confusing terminology further, but yes, it should be noted that the early theosophy itself used several schemas of "the seven principles". For example, in some models the two kinds of manas are counted as one, while in the others, they are separate. Also, the term "astral body" has been used in several contradictory meanings by different authors, or even by the same author at different contexts.

The principle of the seven principles that the Star of Azazel uses is constructed to become obvious from the so-called "Hieroglyphic Key", where there are two trinities that correspond to each other (spiritual Will corresponding to earthly will that is body; spiritual Love corresponding to earthly emotions; spiritual Intellect corresponding to earthly reason), and the cross of vital fire uniting them. Above this structure is the Monad, or the absolute deepest reality of an individual which is her being in "God"; and below this structure is the seeming physical body, this mountain of molecules we carry and act through.

The basis of this Star of Azazel's sevenfold principle system is very close to what Blavatsky gave in her Esoteric Instructions (which also omitted sthûla sharîra from the list of principles, unlike from exoteric theosophy, where the mundane physical body had been given as a valid principle), with a few modifications:

– "Auric envelope" is still considered "too sacred" (i.e. not belonging to the sevenfold schema) to be discussed in this, but Atma is kept instead and seen as a valid principle.
– SoA stresses the aspect of Love & Unity for buddhi: this is not as explicitly pointed out in theosophy or the Sanskrit terminology onto which it is based.
– The triadic correspondences have been drawn for the SoA model (forming together the three lines of "sevens" vertically).

Here is the Hieroglyphic Key, where hopefully the triads & the principles can most easily be seen. It is fully (or let's say 99 %) compatible with the Secret Doctrine and theosophical principle structures:


SoA_Schema_of_7+2_Principles.jpg
[/color]
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
Polyhymnia
Soror
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 7:20 pm

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Polyhymnia » Tue May 21, 2019 10:38 pm

I'm going to have to read, contemplate, and reread, so if I take a little while to reply it's not because I'm slacking :lol: I'm just trying to absorb this information and apply it to the proem. I'm done reading it, but I think I need to contemplate a little further and maybe spend a little more time in meditation before writing about it. The diagram is very helpful!
"Limited love asks for possession of the beloved, but the unlimited asks only for itself." -Kahlil Gibran
User avatar
Aquila
Frater
Posts: 681
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:14 pm

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Aquila » Wed May 22, 2019 2:13 pm

I'm often struggling with the vocabulary, too, though I think I have learned the basics quite well already. Blavatsky's writing style just doesn't give much mercy to my ignorance of certain concepts from eastern religions. She often spends quite a while proving something that nowadays seem a bit outdated but some of the occult ideas that seem extremely valuable come in quick flashes and then she continues onward to other issues. The Proem concentrates on the very basics of the occult worldview and the creation but this part already includes so much information that several more books could easily be written on any of the subjects Blavatsky writes about. And maybe this could be an idea worth thinking as I believe that Blavatsky and her Masters had the idea of giving an impulse to carry onward and in benefit of advancing our spiritual growth and to give us keys to expand our understanding. Blavatsky's flow is kind of like channeling and there are many points where I would just wish to pause her to ask more questions or elaborate a bit. I think I'd really need to try and illustrate some kind of map of all the concepts and what their role is in relation to each other just to know how to place the concepts in the image that I already have in my mind as a tool toward clearer understanding.

Sometimes there are parts where Blavatsky seems to slow down a bit and things are more clearer. For example, when she writes about duality as the essence of existence and Fohat as the bridge between these polarities - Divine Thought and the Cosmic Substance, or between spirit and matter - and the sections that follow which include brief explanations of the order of manifestation and concepts of Buddhi and Manas pop up. These and other parts that somehow come closer to human life and consciousness give me a stronger sensation of divine realization within us.

During the coming pages it could be interesting to ponder and compare how and if the seven stanzas relate to other seven-fold systems in any ways like the seven days of creation, seven celestial archetypes, seven theosophical principles etc.
User avatar
Polyhymnia
Soror
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 7:20 pm

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Polyhymnia » Mon May 27, 2019 8:15 pm

Okay. After much mulling, meditating, and rereading, I think I've got enough to share some thoughts.

In my version of the book Blavatsky starts the proem off with the explanation of the origin of the texts, much like Silvaeon described his introduction, so I think perhaps the editors skipped the main intro in this version and condensed it to what they perhaps felt were the key points to give context to the background of the text, so I will take that to mean the proem starts where she establishes the Secret Doctrine's three fundamental propositions.

My notes are direct lift, condensed, paraphrases from my version, but this is how I best absorb information, so bear with me.

A) ONE ABSOLUTE- BE-NESS- symbolized by finite intelligence as the theological trinity. An omnipresent, eternal, boundless and immutable PRINCIPLE on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or similitude.
“Be-ness” rather than Being and beyond all thought or speculation. Symbolized under two aspects: Absolute abstract space, representing bare subjectivity, the one thing which no human mind can either exclude from any conception or conceive by itself. Absolute motion, representing unconditioned consciousness. Motion best symbolizing change. The Great Breath.

Ok, so in relation to the Hieroglyphic Key, the first proposition would be represented by Monad? And Atma, Manas, an Buddhi representing the theological Trinity? I feel as though I'm overlooking something. In the book, is the theological Trinity she refers to the trinity of absolute abstract space (bare subjectivity), absolute abstract motion (unconditioned consciousness), but I can't seem to figure out what the third is.

I'll leave my first round of thoughts and questions here before tackling the second and third propositions so as to try and get a better understanding before getting ahead of myself.
"Limited love asks for possession of the beloved, but the unlimited asks only for itself." -Kahlil Gibran
User avatar
Cerastes
Soror
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 10:31 pm

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Cerastes » Fri May 31, 2019 11:21 pm

It will take me a few more days to arrange my thoughts so that they can be understood. By now I read it in English and my native language and for some reason the English version is easier to understand. Blavatsky and me are probably not getting best friends but many things that I read over very fast last time make a lot more sense now. Still I'm a very slow reader who needs to stop and think every few sentences to put the picture together and the more I think about it, the more questions accure and the more associations with other texts appear.

By the way...Does anyone understand the difference between Brahma and Parabrahma?
“Granny Weatherwax was not lost. She wasn't the kind of person who ever became lost. It was just that, at the moment, while she knew exactly where SHE was, she didn't know the position of anywhere else.”
(Terry Pratchett, Wyrd Sisters)
User avatar
Smaragd
Frater
Posts: 445
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:27 am

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Smaragd » Sat Jun 01, 2019 1:13 am

First of all apologies for taking so long with this part. I tried to get it done by Wednesday but my comments were all over the place and I've still got couple pages to go! Will try to keep it more compact in the future.

The Proem circling around oneness was both revealing and baffling. In addition to this central theme, I found the skeleton descriptions of the stanzas helpful, and the description of different stages of logos very interesting. I could spend weeks and months in some of these paragraphs.
The jump from oneness to Logos intrigues me as the orthodox Brahmins way is critiqued by Blavatsky. Phanes comes to mind from the golden egg:
Secret Doctrine wrote:The orthodox Brahmins, those who rise the most against the Pantheists and Adwaitees, calling them Atheists, are forced, if Manu has any authority in this matter, to accept the death of Brahma, the creator, at the expiration of every “Age” of this (creative) deity (100 Divine years — a period which in our years requires fifteen figures to express it). Yet, no philosopher among them will view this “death” in any other sense than as a temporary disappearance from the manifested plane of existence, or as a periodical rest.
The Occultists are, therefore, at one with the Adwaita Vedantin philosophers as to the above tenet. They show the impossibility of accepting on philosophical grounds the idea of the absolute all creating or even evolving the “Golden Egg,” into which it is said to enter in order to transform itself into Brahma — the Creator, who expands himself later into gods and all the visible Universe.
The circling around the theme of oneness reminds me how we, who seek the truth, circle around this empty space half-blind while with the higher perception we can see the seven skins of the "Eternal Mother-Father", to which our inner lives connect. If I understand it right, the limited fallen things are included in oneness (it's problematic to exclude anything from it of course, but it seems necessary from the perspective of this dynamic plane) when the meaning, read in the skins, connect to the fallen principles. Our perception of material existence is only an approximate interpretation made by our logical system (brains with our five senses being part of it), and in this fallen state when meaning is lost we are drowning in lies that are sort of a feedback loop of misunderstanding Satan and in that way we close ourselves in a drape of detached materia through which the laws and the beauty of the gods - the law of the real inner world can't be seen.

Skeleton of Stanza I
The First Stanza describes the state of the one all during Pralaya, before the first flutter of re-awakening manifestation.
A moment’s thought shows that such a state can only be symbolised; to describe it is impossible. Nor can it be symbolised except in negatives; for, since it is the state of Absoluteness per se, it can possess none of those specific attributes which serve us to describe objects in positive terms. Hence that state can only be suggested by the negatives of all those most abstract attributes which men feel rather than conceive, as the remotest limits attainable by their power of conception.
Suggesting by negatives reminds me of the idea how Satan points to the opposite direction always, negating any attribute and thus pointing to the oneness.

Skeletons of Stanzas III & IV
I've understood that Monad is the master (more precisely Satan standing in the crossroad of every separation making the law visible for our eyes) embodying the whole of the higher triad of the Hieroglyphic Key. I find it interesting how the septenary of Dhyan-Chohans ie. archangels are suggested to appear down the hierarchy of emanation after monad, as if by becoming the master in our ascending path we rule, not only angles but archangels? It may be problematic to compare the language of "the orthodox" with the Eastern traditions as Blavatsky doesn't seem to find much sympathy from Christians laws. Anyway, I guess the state of the Dhyan-Chohans is so deeply soaked in the Monadic "command" that hierarchies and differentiation are only heuristic symbolic descriptions reaching towards our poor visibility (which is a thought I hope to find the key from to read the stanzas as Blavatsky suggests to be read them).
"Indeed it must be remembered that all these Stanzas appeal to the inner faculties rather than to the ordinary comprehension of the physical brain"

Skeletons of Stanzas V & VI
If I remember correctly the Mahatma Letters also dealt with the concept of the images or the ideas of planets existing in the total darkness of a pralaya afterwhich it will start to gather minerals to it's center in its spatial existence as will a human embryo in the womb of the mother.
Aquila wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 2:13 pm
During the coming pages it could be interesting to ponder and compare how and if the seven stanzas relate to other seven-fold systems in any ways like the seven days of creation, seven celestial archetypes, seven theosophical principles etc.
Secret Doctrine wrote: The God of the Apostle-Initiate and of the Rishi being both the Unseen and the Visible space. Space is called in the esoteric symbolism “the Seven-Skinned Eternal Mother-Father.” It is composed from its undifferentiated to its differentiated surface of seven layers.
Long I have been thinking the seven archetypes form a kind of their own layer and thus a bit reluctantly seeing the seven planetary spirits connected to the septenary of Theosophic Principles, or The Hieroglyphic Key. The latter quote assures me to see the legitimacy in drawing correspondences between the principles lower and higher triads and the planetary spirits.
Secret Doctrine wrote: It is the one life, eternal, invisible, yet Omnipresent, without beginning or end, yet periodical in its regular manifestations, between which periods reigns the dark mystery of non-Being; unconscious, yet absolute Consciousness; unrealisable, yet the one self-existing reality; truly, “a chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason.”
This seems to point that understanding or knowing metaphysical laws is the divine consciousness. Thus truly knowing is breaking free of the sensory world of maya, and which pralaya is a representation of in a cosmic scale.
Secret Doctrine wrote:Its one absolute attribute, which is itself, eternal, ceaseless Motion, is called in esoteric parlance the “Great Breath,”* which is the perpetual motion of the universe, in the sense of limitless, ever-present space. That which is motionless cannot be Divine.
Reminds me of art discussion on the Finnish forums which brought back, yet again, some precious childhood memories of ever falling motion (revealed by a seemingly still moment) of perpetual horror.
Secret Doctrine wrote:Intra-Cosmic motion is eternal and ceaseless
Manu I understand to be the human spirit risen to be the Lord of a Manvantara and thus is this motion with the next Manu who is prepared for such an initiation with the rest of humanitys inner progression.
Secret Doctrine wrote:Occultism sums up the “One Existence” thus: “Deity is an arcane, living (or moving) fire, and the eternal witnesses to this unseen Presence are Light, Heat, Moisture,” — this trinity including, and being the cause of, every phenomenon in Nature.
This fire I'm interpreting as the Monad which can be artificially divided in to manas-light, budhi-warmth & atma-moisture (will sweating itself alive). When we understand the gods working in us we receive flashes of this unseen fire. The seeming immobility of gods might be seen actually the only real movement of the universe. When we see a stone falling from a cliff it's only real in our meaningful interpretation/immediate "fohatic beeingness" that is both in the monad of the stone and the interpreter.

In the complex term jungle Blavatsky forms (apparently almost entirely according to the 19th century orientalist preferences) worsened by the Finnish translation, it is much of a relief to find in the middle of this jungle a familiar names, or so I presume, for the baffling complexity:
"Hot Breath is the Father who devours the progeny of the many-faced Element (heterogeneous) ; and leaves the single-faced ones (homogeneous)."
Saturn, right? Also reminding of the Celestial Hymn of Mercury where we close thousand eyes and open one. Sort of a reversed Saturn to meet Mercury.
"Cool Breath is the Mother, who conceives, forms, brings forth, and receives them back into her bosom, to reform them at the Dawn (of the Day of Brahmâ..."
Venus-Lucifer?

Polyhymnia wrote:
Mon May 27, 2019 8:15 pm
A) ONE ABSOLUTE- BE-NESS- symbolized by finite intelligence as the theological trinity. An omnipresent, eternal, boundless and immutable PRINCIPLE on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or similitude.
“Be-ness” rather than Being and beyond all thought or speculation. Symbolized under two aspects: Absolute abstract space, representing bare subjectivity, the one thing which no human mind can either exclude from any conception or conceive by itself. Absolute motion, representing unconditioned consciousness. Motion best symbolizing change. The Great Breath.

Ok, so in relation to the Hieroglyphic Key, the first proposition would be represented by Monad? And Atma, Manas, an Buddhi representing the theological Trinity? I feel as though I'm overlooking something. In the book, is the theological Trinity she refers to the trinity of absolute abstract space (bare subjectivity), absolute abstract motion (unconditioned consciousness), but I can't seem to figure out what the third is.
If we are to follow the propositions a, b, c spanning over the pages 14 to 17 the third might be c) "The fundamental identity of all Souls with the Universal Over-Soul, the latter being itself an aspect of the Unknown Root; and the obligatory pilgrimage for every Soul" ie. buddhi with an obvious connection to atma (this higher triad, I suppose, is never in separation but is always one ideal). I can see atma in bare subjectivity but also buddhi in the abstract space, while absolute abstract motion I'd easily connect to manas. But this feels a bit rigid, not sure if there's a good reason for it.
Cerastes wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 11:21 pm
It will take me a few more days to arrange my thoughts so that they can be understood. By now I read it in English and my native language and for some reason the English version is easier to understand. Blavatsky and me are probably not getting best friends but many things that I read over very fast last time make a lot more sense now. Still I'm a very slow reader who needs to stop and think every few sentences to put the picture together and the more I think about it, the more questions accure and the more associations with other texts appear.

By the way...Does anyone understand the difference between Brahma and Parabrahma?
I can easily relate to your experience with the text.

When the difference between Brahma and Brahmā is opened, I can't see the difference between Brahma and Parabrahma, but am eager to find the difference if such a thing exists. Maybe it's the same seemingly minimal difference that is between the 1st and the 2nd stanzas.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3414
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Nefastos » Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:40 am

I seem to recall that Blavatsky's own explanation should turn up evidentially, but by Brahma and Brahman are meant different stages of Logos (manifested God, world's creator) while by Parabrahman is meant the Absolute God which is both manifested in everything and yet remains eternally unmanifested (~Ein Sof, divinity beyond the universe, changeless and seemingly beingless, because it is "too whole" to be grasped from a finite point of view).

By Sanskrit word para (meaning transcending something, being beyond something and/or being supremely something) or parama the divinities' transcendental and ultimate aspects are underlined. Parabrahman or Parama Shiva are the sum-totals of all cosmic (as well as "anti-cosmic...") manifestation and un-manifestation. I.e., the Absolute.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
Silvaeon
Frater
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:22 am

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Silvaeon » Sat Jun 01, 2019 7:33 pm

The vocabulary is a challenge for me as well as so much of it is new and exciting, although I've started noticing that quite a lot of it is starting to feel familiar as well, from the Mahatma Letters and other readings. So while still often baffling, this is also encouraging. Perseverance will pay off. Thanks for all your notes regarding this, Nefastos!

Smaragd wrote:
Mon May 20, 2019 9:22 pm
Blavatskys labyrinthine writing is alot easier to read when you know some of the background. Last time I think I was baffled what she was going on about Sinnett and masters, but now having read Mahatma Letters it's a lot easier to make sense of it and there's even some beauty behind these defensive declarations.
Much like some of the terminology starting to become familiar, this is something I've really noticed as well.
Smaragd wrote:
Mon May 20, 2019 9:22 pm
I would suggest we make page number references, if such are needed, from this version of the book, which is "a character-for-character, line-for-line reproduction of the two-volume 1888 first edition", but do as you will: https://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd ... _eBook.pdf
And thanks for this, it will save me a lot of time typing out quotes, ha. Seems to line up perfectly with the version I'm working off of too.

Cerastes wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 11:21 pm
I'm a very slow reader who needs to stop and think every few sentences to put the picture together and the more I think about it, the more questions accure and the more associations with other texts appear.
You're not alone in this. At one point last week it took me a couple hours to read a measly 6 pages because I kept getting swept off in a million different trains of thought requiring research, haha.

I'm going to try and read through the Proem once more today and hopefully offer some thoughts about the actual concepts discussed afterwards.
User avatar
Silvaeon
Frater
Posts: 204
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 12:22 am

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Silvaeon » Sat Jun 01, 2019 10:46 pm

OK, on to the rest... Sorry for the wall of text :o :lol:


Secret Doctrine pg 1+2 wrote:The one circle is divine Unity, from which all proceeds, whither all returns. Its circumference— a forcibly limited symbol, in view of the limitation of the human mind —indicates the abstract, ever incognisable presence, and its plane, the Universal Soul, although the two are one. Only the face of the Disk being white and the ground all around black, shows clearly that its plane is the only knowledge, dim and hazy though it still is, that is attainable by man. It is on this plane that the Manvantaric manifestations begin ; for it is in this soul that slumbers, during the Pralaya, the Divine Thought, wherein lies concealed the plan of every future Cosmogony and Theogony. It is the one life, eternal, invisible, yet Omnipresent, without beginning or end, yet periodical in its regular manifestations, between which periods reigns the dark mystery of non-Being ; unconscious, yet absolute Consciousness ; unrealisable, yet the one self-existing reality ; truly, “ a chaos to the sense, a Kosmos to the reason.” Its one absolute attribute, which is itself, eternal, ceaseless Motion, is called in esoteric parlance the “ Great Breath,” which is the perpetual motion of the universe, in the sense of limitless, ever-present space. That which is motionless cannot be Divine. But then there is nothing in fact and reality absolutely motionless within the universal soul.
Much of the same text that Smaragd highlighted. I thought the description of white circle with the black background, followed by the white circle with the dot in its centre (representing the germ which will become the universe) and all the different following stages to be really simple and beautiful. The image of the Great Breath exhaling and inhaling (manifesting and disappearing universes) was really striking to me as well. Reading this type of description of the Absolute gave me the same feeling of excitement as when I first read Nefastos' explanations of it in Polyharmonia. I also find the relation of the concept of space to the Absolute which Blavatsky describes at length throughout the rest of the text to make the concept a little easier to understand for us on the material plane.


Secret Doctrine pg 3 wrote:The esoteric doctrine teaches, like Buddhism and Brahminism, and even the Kabala, that the one infinite and unknown Essence exists from all eternity, and in regular and harmonious successions is either passive or active. In the poetical phraseology of Manu these conditions are called the “ Days ” and the “ Nights ” of Brahmâ. The latter is either “ awake ” or “ asleep.” The Svabhâvikas, or philosophers of the oldest school of Buddhism (which still exists in Nepaul), speculate only upon the active condition of this “ Essence,” which they call Svâbhâvat, and deem it foolish to theorise upon the abstract and “ unknowable ” power in its passive condition.
One of the things driving me slightly crazy about the text so far is that Blavatsky uses all these different terms which are in reality describing the same thing. Would it be correct to interpret Svâbhâvat (from theosophy wiki: su, good, perfect, fair, handsome; sva, self; and bhâva being, or state of being) as interchangeable with the Absolute or Parabrahman?


Secret Doctrine pg 10 wrote: In contradistinction to the manifested universe of matter, the term Mulaprakriti (from Mula, “ the root,” and prakriti, “ nature ”), or the unmanifested primordial matter—called by Western alchemists Adam’s Earth—is applied by the Vedantins to Parabrahmam. Matter is dual in religious metaphysics, and septenary in esoteric teachings, like everything else in the universe. ...“ From its (the Logos’) objective standpoint, Parabrahmam appears to it as Mulaprakriti. . . . Of course this Mulaprakriti is material to it, as any material object is material to us. . . . Parabrahmam is an unconditioned and absolute reality, and Mulaprakriti is a sort of veil thrown over it.”
Another one of these terms is Mulaprakriti, which to me feels so close to Parabrahman, but not quite. Perhaps this Mulaprakriti could be represented by the circle with the line through it ("it now symbolises a divine immaculate mother-nature within the all-embracing absolute Infinitude") which Blavatsky talks about as coming after the circle with the dot. Later (pg 18) Blavatsky also says " In its absoluteness, the One Principle under its two aspects (of Parabrahmam and Mulaprakriti) is sexless, unconditioned and eternal. Its periodical (manvantaric) emanation—or primal radiation—is also One, androgynous and phenomenally finite." so the two terms seem very closely related indeed.


Secret Doctrine pg 4 wrote:In like manner, when the passive condition is resumed, a contraction of the Divine essence takes place, and the previous work of creation is gradually and progressively undone. The visible universe becomes disintegrated, its material dispersed ; and ‘ darkness ’ solitary and alone, broods once more over the face of the ‘ deep.’
"face of the deep" brings to mind the Hymn to the Master of Death where the phrase is used.

Onwards to the three fundamental propositions. To me these feel like simplified tenets of the previous pages of circling conversation, but feel useful to leave here as reference.

(a) An Omnipresent, Eternal, Boundless, and Immutable Principle on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or similitude. It is beyond the range and reach of thought—in the words of Mandukya, “unthinkable and unspeakable.”
In other words, the Absolute. I think one of the things that jumped out at me in her explanation of the above is the seeming duality of spirit and matter:
Secret Doctrine pg 15+16 wrote:Hence it will be apparent that the contrast of these two aspects of the Absolute is essential to the existence of the “ Manifested Universe.” Apart from Cosmic Substance, Cosmic Ideation could not manifest as individual consciousness, since it is only through a vehicle of matter that consciousness wells up as “ I am I,” a physical basis being necessary to focus a ray of the Universal Mind at a certain stage of complexity. Again, apart from Cosmic Ideation, Cosmic Substance would remain an empty abstraction, and no emergence of consciousness could ensue. The “ Manifested Universe,” therefore, is pervaded by duality, which is, as it were, the very essence of its ex-istence as “ manifestation.” But just as the opposite poles of subject and object, spirit and matter, are but aspects of the One Unity in which they are synthesized, so, in the manifested Universe, there is “ that ” which links spirit to matter, subject to object.
Which brings us to the term Fohat, which if I'm understanding correctly, is the link between spirit and matter and the dynamic energy between them. This feels very simplified, but I'm sure we will get to learn more on Fohat as the text progresses.

( b.) The Eternity of the Universe in toto as a boundless plane ; periodically “ the playground of numberless Universes incessantly manifesting and disappearing,” called “ the manifesting stars,” and the “ sparks of Eternity.” “ The Eternity of the Pilgrim ” is like a wink of the Eye of Self-Existence (Book of Dzyan.) “ The appearance and disappearance of Worlds is like a regular tidal ebb of flux and reflux.”
This feels fairly straight-forward to me, meaning the cyclic law of the creation and dissolution of universes.

(c) The fundamental identity of all Souls with the Universal OverSoul, the latter being itself an aspect of the Unknown Root ; and the obligatory pilgrimage for every Soul—a spark of the former—through the Cycle of Incarnation (or “ Necessity ”) in accordance with Cyclic and Karmic law, during the whole term.
I think this has to do with our individual consciousness being one with the Absolute, and the cycles of reincarnation our souls undergo as a result of their karma.


Smaragd wrote:
Sat Jun 01, 2019 1:13 am
Aquila wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 2:13 pm
During the coming pages it could be interesting to ponder and compare how and if the seven stanzas relate to other seven-fold systems in any ways like the seven days of creation, seven celestial archetypes, seven theosophical principles etc.
Secret Doctrine wrote: The God of the Apostle-Initiate and of the Rishi being both the Unseen and the Visible space. Space is called in the esoteric symbolism “the Seven-Skinned Eternal Mother-Father.” It is composed from its undifferentiated to its differentiated surface of seven layers.
Long I have been thinking the seven archetypes form a kind of their own layer and thus a bit reluctantly seeing the seven planetary spirits connected to the septenary of Theosophic Principles, or The Hieroglyphic Key. The latter quote assures me to see the legitimacy in drawing correspondences between the principles lower and higher triads and the planetary spirits.

I just noticed another quote during my re-read pertaining to the above ^. Definitely going to be interesting:
Secret Doctrine pg 20+21 wrote:The Stanzas, therefore, give an abstract formula which can be applied, mutatis mutandis, to all evolution : to that of our tiny earth, that of the chain of planets of which that earth forms one, to the solar Universe to which that chain belongs, and so on, in an ascending scale, till the mind reels and is exhausted in the effort. The seven Stanzas given in this volume represent the seven terms of this abstract formula. They refer to, and describe the seven great stages of the evolutionary process, which are spoken of in the Purânas as the “ Seven Creations,” and in the Bible as the “ Days ” of Creation.
User avatar
Polyhymnia
Soror
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2019 7:20 pm

Re: Reading Circle (Blavatsky: The Secret Doctrine)

Postby Polyhymnia » Sun Jun 02, 2019 5:32 pm

It has come to my attention that I'm reading a VERY abridged version of this (my proem is six pages long), so I'm going to read the pdf version that's posted on the theosophical society webpage. The following pretty much encompasses what the text in my version contains in the proem:

A) ONE ABSOLUTE- BE-NESS- symbolized by finite intelligence as the theological trinity. An omnipresent, eternal, boundless and immutable PRINCIPLE on which all speculation is impossible, since it transcends the power of human conception and could only be dwarfed by any human expression or similitude.
“Be-ness” rather than Being (Sat in Sanskrit) and beyond all thought or speculation. Symbolized under two aspects: Absolute abstract space, representing bare subjectivity, the one thing which no human mind can either exclude from any conception or conceive by itself. Absolute motion, representing unconditioned consciousness. Motion best symbolizing change. The Great Breath.

B) Absolute universality is that law of periodicity, of flux and reflux, of ebb and flow, which is scientifically recorded in all parts of nature. the eternity of the universe as a boundless plane. The manifesting stars and the sparks of eternity “the playground of numberless Universes incessantly manifesting and disappearing like a regular tidal ebb of flux and reflux. Day/night. Life/death. Sleeping/waking.

C) Identity of all Souls with the Universal Over-Soul, which is an aspect of the Unknown Root; and the obligatory pilgrimage for every Soul through the Cycle of Incarnation (Necessity) in accordance with Cyclic and Karmic law, during the whole term. No purely spiritual Buddhi (divine soul) can have an independent (conscious) existence before the spark which issues from the Over Soul (universal sixth principal) has passed through every elemental form of phenomenal world of that Manvatara and (b) acquired individuality, first by natural impulse, then by self induced and self devised efforts (checked by its karma) this ascending through all the degrees of intelligence, from the lowest to the highest Manas, from mineral up to holiest archangel (dhyani-Buddha).

I'm going to do some cross-referencing with both versions and I will get back to you all with more in depth thoughts.
"Limited love asks for possession of the beloved, but the unlimited asks only for itself." -Kahlil Gibran

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests