Theosophy

Theosophy

Spiritual
Hierarchy

Return to Healing

A secular Religion

A doctrine of religious philosophy and metaphysics originating with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831–91). In this context, theosophy holds that all religions are attempts by the “Spiritual Hierarchy” to help humanity in evolving to greater perfection, and that each religion therefore has a portion of the truth. Together with Henry Steel Olcott, William Quan Judge, and others, Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society in 1875.

Another group that’s on the right track. Yet another valid perspective on life.

Shamans believe that disturbances can be treated in the luminous body or aura before they manifest in the body. The process provides techniques for assisting a client in shedding her/his past before those wounds manifest as illness. Some of this work is similar to Jungian analysis in that it works with archetypes and the mythical, but the effects are felt more quickly. Carol provides a short overview of depth psychology and describes how a shaman can intervene to remove negative patterns.

In the shamanic tradition the warrior who goes to battle loses that part of his persona that knows that killing is evil. When they return there is a disconnect between who they are and who they should be. This is known as PTSD. They have a yearning to be whole. A hole in the soul, if you will. It is the shaman’s duty to re-integrate the persona, to perform a “soul retrieval”

Shamanlinks Theosophical SouRetrival


4 Responses to “Theosophy”

  1. walt,

    there are many theo-philosophical belief systems that one could say are ‘on the right track’, the ‘basics’ of which have been around for eons; i.e. they were evidently smothered/over-powered by what has emerged more recently. so, there are two aspects to transcending the dysfunction that we are currently in; (a) orienting to a belief system that ‘makes more natural sense’, and (b) understanding what is keeping us locked into our current paradigm.

    to me, nietzsche has touched on a very important (b) aspect; i.e. that we have infused the anthropocentric notion of ‘intention’ into our understanding of the world dynamic (the dynamics of nature). ‘intention’ and ‘intrinsic final cause’ are principles we have infused into physics. that was nietzsche’s point. ‘attraction’ and ‘repulsion’ are human feelings associated with ‘the ego’; i.e. ‘attraction’ associates with the feeling of ‘possession’ (control of, or ownership of property, be it ‘slaves’ or ‘employees’ or the ‘king’s subjects’ or plots of land or whatever) while ‘repulsion’ associates with the feeling of ‘exclusion’, ‘elimination’, ‘destruction’. the basic western model of an organism, including a human organism, is an ‘input-output’ machine. the idea is that the organism is a LOCAL material system with its own locally originating internal process driven behaviours. ‘attraction’ (possession, consumption) is the ‘input’ side of things while ‘repulsion’ (elimination, exclusion, excretion) is the ‘output’ side of things. the world is our oyster (inpute, fuel or food supply) in this LOCAL CENTRE or ‘ego’ based view of ourselves and the world (i.e. this view relegates everything that is not us, to an ‘input’ or ‘resource’.

    so, to continue to infuse this worldview into our children by way of education falls in the ‘b’ side of things, it ‘blocks’ and ‘continually returns’ our understanding to what seems like a neutral ‘physics’ (understanding of dynamics) which is not at all neutral but which has ‘ego’ built into it.

    if the individual and collective behaviour of a group of kayakers is being orchestrated by a vortical tidal current so that if they stop paddling, they all move in a large (e.g. one kilometer) spiral towards an implicit vortex-centre, our physics facilitates the ‘localizing’ of the forces so that we understand the behaviour of the individual kayaker according to the local resultant force. thus, the current is understood as a vector field that has a vector force (magnitude and direction) definable at every point on its surface. this allows us to think in terms of a local external force applied to the kayak which ‘causes’ the kayak to accelerate (F=ma). what is lost here in this localization by way of the notional ‘vector field’ (newton’s invention to avoid the three-body-problem) is the ‘shape’ of the ‘field’ (the vortical shape precedes the flow of the water, just as the shape of a thermal field precedes the emergence of the convection cell).

    by removing the ‘shape of the field’ we end up with the notion that we can come up with a local ‘resultant force’ that is the sum of the local externally applied force and the force that arises from the paddling. we say that this resultant force determines the movement of the individual kayak. when we look at the kayakers all paddling away, we then say that they are determining their own movement, and thus treat the flow they are in as something ‘secondary’, as a ‘noise’ or unwanted inhibitor of their purpose that they must overcome when it is an expression of their ‘parenting medium’ that they are intrinsically included in. it is the ‘real’ reference frame, not the notional absolute space they are doing their mental calculations in which reduces everything to local centres.

    now that we have turned everything upside down and ‘denied’ the natural precedence of the ‘parenting medium’ we are included in, and egotistically elevated our ‘self’ to the local source of what unfolds (the Aristotelian acorn-to-oak-tree self image), we create the imagery that we are in a struggle with nature. nature is trying to stop us from achieving our self-centre driven purposive objectives such as ‘survival’.

    pretty soon, we are building theories which have separated and elevated man, portraying him as the local creator of unfolding dynamics, dynamics that are now ‘intentional’ and ‘purposeful’, unlike the alleged ‘chaos’ of nature.

    pretty soon, we have got things so thoroughly backwards we are using this ‘struggle with nature’ as the engine for change, an engine whose power derives from the internals of local material objects/organisms; e.g.

    ‘On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.’

    this is insanity. it is a mental roadblock in the ‘b’ category of keeping us locked in. we can advocate theo-philosophical belief systems that tend towards the cultivation and sustaining of harmony, but so long as our education system keeps making our children comfortable with the ‘absurd’ (R.D. Laing, ‘The Politics of Exerience’, Jules Henry, ‘Culture Against Man’), we as a collective will continually return to these absurd concepts/understanding to direct our behaviour and organise our collective activities (as in hierarchical organizations of government and commerce).

    ted

  2. ellocogringo Says:

    Well hello Mr Ted
    Let’s hope we get to “a” before this whole house of cards collapses. what pisses me off about education is they know (but do not understand) what they’re doing. They know about the imprinting but “know” that bottom up thinking, or inclusional if you prefer is “wrong” They know they’re “fucking up” (Instilling values in) our kids permanently. there is currently a rising number of constructivist (bottom up) advocates, but the percentage is about the same as in the general population 80/20 idiot/non-idiot. here’s that post

    http://ellocogringo.wordpress.com/2010/07/03/oracle/
    walt

  3. walt,

    i am not so ‘strong’ on the we/they split as you seem to be with your categories of ‘idiots’ and ‘non-idiots’ etc. most of my life has been spent spent trying to wear the clothes of the western culture and being very uncomfortable with them, and trying to discover ‘why’.

    now i can see things as in the kayak example where we not only ‘throw out the extrinsic shaping influence’ that brought us here, but we make ourselves out as lonely martyrs whose intrinsic acorn-to-oak-tree purposive drive is ‘in a struggle with nature’?@#!???

    in the course of this struggle, we congratulate OURSELVES for whatever unfolds that is beneficial to us. if we get a full bucket of clams, we credit ourselves with the cleverness and industriousness to go and get them, and the shaping influence of the dynamic space we are included in, having been cast aside, is seen as a wild beast that we have mastered.

    how backwards is that?

    so, when i wore those clothes uncomfortably, i was keeping the system going and educating my children in this bullshit way. so if i make the idiot/non-idiot split, i have to split myself in half.

    ted

    • ellocogringo Says:

      Hi Ted
      Nope, you’re centered pretending to be an idiot. Or if you prefer, an amerind pretending to be a “white man”. This is why I felt you have much to say to amerinds. that education is a disguise only, or armor to be put on, allowing free access but protecting the wearer. I am reminded of Parcival. let me find it. just a minute. OK I’m back thanks for waiting. Jeez there’s a ton of versions. anyway I got this;

      “After the death of his father, Percival’s mother takes him to the Welsh forests where she raises him ignorant to the ways of men until the age of 15. Eventually, however, a group of knights passes through his wood, and Percival is struck by their heroic bearing. Wanting to be a knight himself, the boy travels to King Arthur’s court ”

      I don’t feel like wading through these but in one of them Parcival covered the plain home-spun garment his mother made him for the grand clothes of the court. As he grew he increasingly came to understand the value and worth of what his mother had given him and finally put the finery aside. He realized that the home spun garment was something to be proud of, not ashamed. The other knights envied the sturdy practically and asked where they could get one. too late, their mothers were dead and they had discarded theirs.

      these fables were meant to be read at different levels, something for children, something for peasents, something for nobility, something for knights. each group got something out of them.

      walt

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: