Busy week ahead - Merry Christmas everybody :)

By Katinka Hesselink - All Considering | December 22nd, 2008

Hi all,

I don’t think I’ll be blogging all that much this week. So I think I’ll just say Merry Christmas now, when I still have the time. We’ve got a big Christmas celebration coming up with my family (kids and grandkids of my one still alive grandmother) - since it’s in the town where I live, I’ll be helping out a lot.

I’ve had a great time blogging these past months, so I thought I’d share the most popular posts on this blog so far. The most commented are:

Aside from the many comments my blogposts are attracting (thanks everyone) this blog now has about 50 pageviews a day. Not bad for a new blog, I think.
Unfortunately google analytics only has statistics for December - so I don’t know how this compares to previous months (don’t know where the statistics went). It is clear however that one post (aside from the ones mentioned above) was very popular: Messengers of the Masters or the Great White Brotherhood.

I think that’s likely it for 2008 …

Leave a comment

Blavatsky and music

By Katinka Hesselink - All Considering | December 19th, 2008

Madame Blavatsky was known best for her occultism, obviously, but her professional life included concert tours in Italy and Russia playing the piano under the pseudonym ‘Madame Laura’. Olcott reports (in his Old Diary Leaves, first series, p. 458) that she had been a pupil of Moscheles. He says that sometimes, when occupied by one of the Mahatmas, ‘her playing was indescribably grand. She would sit in the dusk sometimes, with nobody else in the room but myself, and strike from the sweet-toned instrument improvisations that might well make one fancy he was listening to the Gandharvas, or heavenly choristers. It was the harmony of heaven.’

It’s not surprising therefor that Blavatsky wrote about music as well. And given that esotericism was her main topic – music became part of her explanations on how the universe works. Going through her works looking for clues as to her main vision, I did not find that she had one overarching theory about how music works esoterically. What I found was more fragmentary, but suggestive non the less.

Perhaps most important for practical reasons is that she notes in Isis Unveiled (Vol. 1, p. 275) that certain types of music can put us in a frenzy, while others evoke religious aspirations. She uses it as an example to show that human beings respond to vibrations: music and colors.

The Mahatmas in their turn call music ‘the most divine and spiritual of arts’ (ML Chronological 85B, (8))

Blavatsky wrote thrilling spiritual stories. They are usually close to the genre of ghost stories or thrillers – but with occult ideas wrapped in. A few of them give a crucial part to music and it’s occult influence. One of her most thrilling spiritual stories is The Ensouled violin (longer version). Another story in which music plays an essential part is The Cave of the Echoes.

In Isis Unveiled (vol. 1, p. 544) H.P. Blavatsky notes that the Ancient Egyptians knew how to use music to heal nervous disorders. [I want to note that in my time as a teacher at a school for special education I found that for many of those kids music was one of their lifelines to normalcy and harmony. Indeed – some could sing very well. Pity I couldn’t have doubled as a music teacher, as the school had none. Blavatsky also discusses people using music as a cure in Isis, vol. 1, p. 215]

In her article ‘Occult or Exact Science’ she goes into a phenomenon that have come to be scientifically studied recently: that some people connect colors to sound, and hear music with certain smells and so on. The technical term is synaesthesia – and wikipedia shares that although the details vary per individual, there are indeed general trends. Higher tones will usually be seen as lighter colors for instance.  Esoterically Blavatsky connects colors to notes in her Esoteric Instructions (CW. Vol. 12, p. 561, 562)

All in all – enough food for thought, I would think :) .

Leave a comment

The place of astrology, tarot, aura reading etc. in spiritual development

By Katinka Hesselink - All Considering | December 17th, 2008

Personally I have been much helped by an astrologer who charted out the various forces in my personality and circumstances. As I came to her after my 30’s, she did not tell me anything new. However, she did help me see these various forces and balance them in my life. A psychic who read my aura when I was 19 had a similar guiding function (though I refused his offer to chart my future – I prefer guiding my own course, even though is general prophecy that it would be hard and there would be many twists and turns has turned out correct). I also dabbled in tarot cards at that time. It was very useful to develop a sense of how symbolism works – and can be used to develop self knowledge and insight into other people’s characters.

All in all – for me these things are temporary. To some extent they are even diversions. I did not linger in any of them – my most persistent effort was regular I-ching readings, but those never gave me anything specific to go on. General insight was never a shortcoming of mine, so I did not really need the I-ching for that.

The TS has long ago stopped advising people to do any of these things. Yet theosophists have insisted on doing them. ;)

Reasons? Well none of these things can replace wisdom itself as a guide. That is: through practical lifestyle changes and developing self-knowledge, tolerance and other virtues. Those who have wisdom hardly need any of this. Which means that all attempts at divination are in the long run futile. Or that’s what the rational mind says.

But in the meantime life is pretty confusing. Our world changes so fast that the way I make my living hardly existed 10 years ago and the details change by the month. This is of course due to the fact that my living is made online: designing websites and getting advertisement income off webpublishing. This field is very new and dynamic.

But life is not just confusing for me. My parents came out of college with the comfortable illusion that what they had trained to be, would define their careers. This was true for neither of them – but their generation could still believe it. When I was in teachers college students often asked themselves and each other: do you see yourself teaching in 10 years time? Even then I answered: no. I could not see that as a future (little did I know I would have to quit teaching much earlier than that).

My point? This world is way too complicated. Individuals have to thread their way through social changes that no one person can keep track of. The economy has just suffered a major hit and at the same time the public has become aware of fundamental problems with our energy use. Both problems were a long time coming, but most people could comfortably ignore them until recently.

This isn’t abstract. It goes to fundamental issues of how people go about their daily lives (by car or by public transportation), which professions students should train for, which skills will be found useful in 10, 20, 30 years time. There is no way to tell a student today whether the skills they are learning today will get them a job in 20 years time. Technology, law and medicine are traditional safe havens – however technology specialists are loosing their jobs in The Netherlands right now.

In such a confusing world it should be no surprise that people turn to traditional divination methods to figure out where to go and what to do with their lives. That is without even touching upon the traditional subject of advice: relationship advice.

To some extent of course these area’s have been taken over by psychologists. They can tell us our talents and academic skills right now. What they can’t do is chart our fundamental motives, nor the circumstances we will find ourselves in 10 or 20 years from now. Learning potential is also very difficult to measure. A good astrologer (that is: one who goes beyond the starsign of one’s birth) CAN look at all that.

What does all this have to do with spiritual development? Well – spirituality does not take place in a vacuum. Theosophists, Buddhists, Yoga practitioners – we are all human beings living in this world. We are in fact more likely to feel the weight of this issue – as we are generally more highly educated than average.

Some of you may be surprised at that statement, but it’s a fact: Alternative spirituality, whether in the shape of Wicca, Buddhism or Theosophy is largely (though not exclusively) an area for educated women and men.

The instability of our world also affects well educated people most. A carpenter is likely to remain a carpenter. Whether he keeps his job is partly up to the fates, but the most that can be expected is that he becomes the manager of a carpentry business. Educated people on the other hand can go into the field they were educated for (still usually a wide variety of possible jobs) or even venture outside it. Each career step has to be weighed. Can I learn more in this job? Does this workplace fit my personal style of working?

One has to keep on learning. But this is also very confusing. Should I develop my technical skills as a blog manager? (Should I learn PHP more?) Should I develop into more of a designer, installing photoshop on my pc and experimenting with it’s options? Should I apply for a job as webeditor, honing my skills as a writer? Those are merely the tip of the iceburg of potential career options for me personally.

Each educated professional has a similar list of options. Notice that only the first has the vaguest connection to my formal education (As math teacher I also had some IT training).

Harder to get a grip on is personal development. For each professional it is a valid question: am I hampered from moving to the next level in my career for reasons of professional training or because my personality gets in the way? If it’s the latter, can I do anything about that or should I move to a field that fits my personality better? This is the type of question a good astrologer or alternative therapist can help with.

Once these methods have proven their practical usefulness, we can’t help but adapt our world view to this fact. If astrology works, there has to be some connection between the stars and my personal life. If aura-reading works, parapsychology must be based on truth. There just might be a soul – despite what most neurologists think. There just might be life after death. There just might be more between heaven and earth…

And that makes it likely for many interested in personal development to become interested in spirituality.

So – what’s the place of divination in spiritual development? It’s often the starting point of a search for spiritual answers to life questions.

4 Comments

How about Music and spirituality?

By Katinka Hesselink - All Considering | December 15th, 2008

I got a question the other day: a reader had been told his taste in music was bad for him spiritually. What did I think? I told him to listen to whatever music he liked.

I do however agree that our taste in music says something about who we are. My taste for classic 80’s hits was obviously born by listening to that kind of music in my teens. My taste for Carnatic music (a style from India) is said to be a sign of spiritual development. Well – so what?

Mostly I think our culture’s obsession with music is a bit weird. I’ve puzzled for some time on what to answer when online social networks ask about my taste in music. Then I found the very spiritually correct answer – I put in ‘silence’. Because really: I hardly listen to music. I never had a Walkman (which were all the craze when I was about 10). I don’t even know the slang word for portable cd-player and I don’t own either an i-pod or mp3 player. I went without speakers on my pc for years – until I caved this summer. [There are too many youtube video’s about spirituality]

The larger issue isn’t whether one’s taste in music is an expression of spiritual development – I think to some extent it probably is. But that doesn’t mean that it can be reversed: just make teenagers listen to Carnatic music and watch how angelic they become…

What’s more – I don’t think our habits can be used to predict our spiritual development. I’ve written about vegetarianism. I’ve written about addiction. These are important issues – but I don’t think they are a measure of spiritual development. I don’t think every drunk is less spiritually advanced than every sober person.

There is a story about some spiritual teacher and his students – let’s say it was Jesus

Jesus and his disciples were walking down the street. One disciple said: we’ve been discussing who amongst us was the most spiritually advanced. We couldn’t decide. Who do you think is the most spiritually advanced? Jesus answered: that person over there – pointing to a drunk lying outside some pub.

Changing our habits, avoiding meat and alcohol and crowds, are like the rod you place next to a sunflower: you put it there hoping it will not fall under it’s own weight. For those of us who are consciously working at our spiritual growth, those things become necessary disciplines.

But ultimately spiritual growth is about what happens in our soul.

When pride gets stuck there – proud of being a vegetarian, proud of not smoking, proud of abstaining from alcohol, proud of listening only to spiritual music – there is something seriously wrong. Spirituality should be about learning to see the best in everyone. We should learn to look beyond the superficial and be able to see the spiritual in that drunk on the street, or that beggar. And if we don’t yet have that ability to see where someone is at spiritually (I certainly don’t) – let’s not replace it with the fake version. Let’s not pretend spiritual growth is like a grade in school: points taken off for every bad habit.

For me listening to trance music doesn’t even count as a bad habit - though whether the trance invoked is a healthy spiritual state is a debate for another day.

7 Comments

The origin of evil – the great mystery

By Katinka Hesselink - All Considering | December 12th, 2008

I asked you, my readers, yesterday why some people insist that the universe is morally neutral. The question means in normal words: why do people believe that evil is as inherent in the universe as good is?

I let my own thoughts on the matter be for the moment, but this post may just be the place to share them.

I have explained karma in previous posts as a moral law. That is: karma rewards good and punishes evil in the long run. There is more to it than that, but this is the basis. Since karma is one of the laws of the universe, the universe is morally on the side of good.

I could stop at that, but since it’s Friday – I thought I’d look up what Blavatsky has to say on the subject. In The Secret Doctrine Blavatsky talks (p. 279, 280) about the Logos. She describes it as a collective creator or architect. The actual work of cosmic creation is done by a lower host of consciousnesses: the demiurgos, aka archangels (note) and other forces combined.

That is – the creator God is as much a unity as a forest is. As it is more correct to see a forest as a collection of trees, other vegetation and wild life – similarly the universe is constantly created and maintained by a host of beings and forces. Some of those forces are known to us, like the laws of gravity and karma. Other forces aren’t.

The point for the present discussion is: Blavatsky insists that each of these forces and consciousnesses is imperfect. In fact, there are sometimes flaws in the way nature acts. This is why, she says, the demiurgos should not be worshiped as God. However, we do owe these forces our gratitude and we ought to be working with them through the creation of ideas (the Secret anyone?) and should devote all our good actions to the Eternal Cause, while sacrificing all our bad intentions.

In other words: the best way to contribute to the spiritual evolution of mankind is by being thinking beings and doing good and giving up selfishness and sin.

In an article called ‘The Origin of Evil’ (C.W. 8, p. 110- ), Blavatsky argues that evil and sorrow are caused by ignorance and attachment. She notes that Buddha kept on living, so the overly pessimistic interpretation of his teachings is not valid. It is the attachment to living that causes so many problems. Suicide is the opposite extreme.

She says:

[Buddha's] doctrine shows evil immanent, not in matter which is eternal, but in the illusions created by it: through the changes and transformations of matter generating life—because these changes are conditioned and such life is ephemeral. At the same time those evils are shown to be not only unavoidable, but necessary. For if we would discern good from evil, light from darkness, and appreciate the former, we can do so only through the contrasts between the two. (p. 112)

In other words: it is our wrong interpretation of the world that causes evil - because we base our action on our misunderstanding and ignorance.

I think that places the responsibility for evil right where it belongs: in the hands of people. After all – an animal which kills isn’t evil. It is merely surviving. It is only humanity which kills beyond it’s need. It is only humanity that kills for ideals so called, and economic interest, and cultural clashes.

Note

I’ve replaced Blavatsky’s term ‘Dhyan Chohan’ with Archangel. The term stands for beings of the highest spiritual rank. Blavatsky explains them as former humans who have grown beyond humanity in spiritual attainment, but still take responsibility for its evolution. For instance: each theosophical root race has its own Dhyan Chohan.

Blavatsky presents the term as one indiginous to Tibetan Buddhism. However Christmas Humphreys notes in his ‘A Popular Dictionary of Buddhism’ that the term Chohan is a Rajput term for someone of high spiritual attainment. He also explains that the Dhyani Bodhisattvas and Dhyani Buddhas are parts of the Tibetan Buddhist pantheon as high spiritual beings. Untill the precise term Dhyan Chohan is found in some obscure Tibetan Text I think educated theosophists will have to assume that Blavatsky meant those two groups plus whatever other high spiritual beings might fit her definition. [I would of course be thrilled if someone versed in Tibetan Buddhism were to tell me that the term Dhyan Chohan or something very like it was in fact Tibetan.]

2 Comments