Cycles

2004-8-20 14:56:00

Lance writes:
Surely with all the positive affirmations that your teachings get Roberts negative approach actually helps to restore some balance?

JJ:
Anyone who has been on the list a few years will know that I have tolerated and answered many attacking my teachings to the point of risking the alienation of many of my good friends on the list.

Those asking questions or challenging because of sincerely seeking do provide balance. Also some balance is achieved by handling outright attacks. What many find tedious and out of balance is to argue for arguments sake - to automatically take the other side no matter what is presented. This can throw the list out of balance in the other direction.

Again, judgment is the key.

Lance:
Roberts main argument seems to be that he can find no evidence of DK teaching anything about a "general rule" of seven lives male and seven lives female. He claims that your ideas are actually out of harmony with what DK is teaching. For him this invalidates your rule. This is a perfectly logical and reasonable objection based upon the fact that you use the writings of DK as evidence to justify your thinking here.

JJ:
No one is faulting him for using DK. I only fault him for using DK and then not accepting what is quoted.

Lance:
Your defense of "DK did not mention UFO's, but I know you believe in them. Why do you believe such when DK did not even briefly mention something so important?" does not help your case. As it may well be the reason that DK never mentioned UFO's is that they are not true either. The fact that this may contradict one of Roberts's own beliefs merely demonstrates that his thinking may well be out of line with DK's in another area.

JJ:
It does make my point. Robert basically said if a thing were true DK would have talked about it. Robert believes in UFO's (I know because his master Creme does) and DK did not mention them. My point clearly illustrates his inconsistency.

Now let us look at this statement once again: "In the course of his many septenary lives, and as the cyclic sevens pass over him,..."

Robert continues to insist that "many septenary lives" does not mean many lives of seven, but means something which he can't seem to explain. It just means something different - something to do with the rays.

This is like taking a statement like "During the many years of my life I have traveled a lot." This does not mean the word "years" and "travel" mean the same thing. Taken separately the years that I have lived is a different subject than travel. The "septenary lives" is a different subject than the rays but was placed together to make a point just as I did with the use of the word "years".

DK often hints at bits of truth by throwing in a side comment.

Robert quoting JJ:
Septenary lives would mean seven lives or cycles of lives, plane and simple and his statement "In the course of his many septenary lives" tells us he is talking about many groupings of seven lives - not seven rays.

Robert:
Furthermore, how you interpret it strictly as "lives" does not explain how the individual on the Path "begins to synthesize and merge the seven into the major three subrays".

JJ:
That's a different subject that has little or nothing to do with that which I have presented.

Robert:
Why does he mention how the seven merge into the major three subrays?

JJ:
Because that is what happens in spiritual evolution.

Robert:
How does His point blank wording of "three subrays" explain your plain and simple explanation that He is speaking distinctly about seven incarnational lives?

JJ:
The quote mentioned was not to prove seven incarnational lives. You said the rays governing the personality are not cyclic in appearance. The quote was to illustrate they are cyclic. Please argue with what I do say.

JJ:
Name an energy that is not effected by the cycle of seven.

He did not name one.

Robert quoting JJ:
Then he gives a long quote that does not refute my point indicating that the rays manifest in cycles.

Robert:
Of course the rays manifest in cycles!

JJ:
I am glad we agree on this now.

You previously disagreed with me on this and said that the soul chooses our rays and they are not cyclic in the personality bodies.

I asked you to supply me with evidence from DK that the soul chooses the personality rays and you did not.

Review (Robert speaking)
If it were true, "as a general rule", which JJ claims, that the soul incarnates in a cycle of seven lives male and seven lives female - DK would have mentioned it - even briefly.

My reply:
DK did not mention UFO's, but I know you believe in them. Why do you believe such when DK did not even briefly mention something so important?

JJ:
To this Robert gives the predictable reply that DK taught that there is life on other planets.

Again, you are using a non answer for an answer. Believing there is life on other planets and believing that UFO's are visiting earth are two entirely different subjects.

According to your statement you should not believe in UFO's because DK definitely did not mention them or even hint at their existence. Checkmate.

Robert:
If the Law of Correspondences can be used to give credibility to any teaching, then use it to give credibility to the teaching that there is no cycle of seven lives male and seven lives female.

JJ:
The Law of Correspondences can be used to support most anything if the logic is flawed and points that do not correspond are said to correspond. If the reasoning is sound it points the way to many truths.

I have no desire to use it to illustrate fallacy. I'll leave that to others.

Robert quoting JJ:
Whenever DK speaks of energy he talks about cycles of seven in relation to it.

Robert:
No, He does not. I can provide many, many quotes where DK speaks of energy and does not talk about "cycles of seven" in relation to it.

JJ:
Then give me an example of where he speaks of an energy that he has not at one time talked about cycles in relation to it.

Earlier in your email you quoted me saying, "nor can a correct correspondence be made." and you responded with, "You give no intelligent reason why not."

Reasons:

Karma does not work within the Law of Cycles, the Law of Cycles works within the Law of Karma."

They are quite interdependent as illustrated in the quotes below:

"This touches upon a mystery and deals with the coming-in of high Egos, of Avatars, of Buddhas, of masters, of initiates, and of disciples, and of all who have to wait for group, and not individual, urge for the fulfillment of CYCLIC KARMA on a large scale, and whose "wheels" are controlled by cosmic forces and not by purely systemic forces." Treatise on Cosmic Fire Pg 852.

"This type of force is primarily concerned with planetary stimulation, with the planetary Logoi, and is hidden in Their CYCLIC KARMA--a karma which of course will incidentally involve those monads and devas which form Their bodies and centres." Treatise on Cosmic Fire Pg 1052.

"It is always difficult to convey any true concept of Karma, because IT PREDOMINANTLY CONCERNS CYCLES and the sequence of world events." Discipleship In the New Age Vol 2 Pg 339.

"This law has the generic name of the 'Law of Cycles', and is expressed in terms of time; but the secret to the cycles may not as yet be given as it would convey to the intuitive too much dangerous information. It is the knowledge of this law as it concerns rounds, races, subraces, groups (involutionary and evolutionary) and individuals (human and superhuman) WHICH ENABLES THE LORDS OF KARMA, AND THE ADEPTS OF THE GOOD LAW, TO MANIPULATE FORCE OR ENERGY, and so carry all that is, on to its triumphant conclusion." Treatise on Cosmic Fire Pg 1141.

Robert:
It is simple common sense that the soul does not incarnate in a cycle of seven lives male and seven lives female - it is not so black and white like that.

JJ:
I see no common sense in your statement. Let me give you some good logic.

Male and female represent the two basic energies of the universe - the positive and negative. All energies manifest in cycles. And also have differing cycles within their manifestation. There is no energy which is not subject to the law of cycles.

Therefore the manifestation of life in the energy of male and female would also be cyclic. There is no reason to doubt this.

The number seven keeps reappearing in relation to energy such as sound (seven notes) light (seven colors) seven rays, etc., it would correspond that there would be also cycles of seven in relation to male/female energies and manifestation.

This manifests as seven cycles of lives as male and female which is sometimes seven actual lives, but can take more if a cycle is not completed.

The soul can make an exception and incarnate the entity against the cycle if a greater cycle demands it, but then there is a catch-up factor that comes into play for cycles are like waves with which we must deal.

Robert:
Now here we are - and I request your help. Can someone actually explain how JJ's "cycle of seven" really works?

JJ:
Why do rays incarnate in cycles? Why are there cycles of life and death, creation and pralaya, prosperity and lack? Cycles work because of the eternal cause and effect that interplays throughout time.

If I were to be wrong about the seven cycles of male and female energy I would not be wrong about the fact that there are cycles, but the number. There is a number associated with cycles of all energy. You seem to be saying that male female energy is an exception to the Law of Correspondences and is not subject to cycles. I do not see this as reasonable thinking.

Note: I did not get this and many other items I teach from reading DK. DK, as do all teachers, left many things unsaid. That is no reason for knee jerk unbelief.

When people are free to do as they please, they usually imitate each other.
Eric Hoffer (1902 - 1983)