[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Paranoid Theosophists?

Jan 05, 1999 02:52 AM
by Leon Maurer

In a message dated 1/4/99 10:34:02 PM, Jerry S wrote:

>>Lastly, I am very disappointed to see the name-calling going on in
>>Disagreements are natural, and for my part civil debate is always welcome,
>>especially if the goal is to explore and clarify the teachings of Theosophy
>>as reported by HPB

I agree with this.  But, as yet I haven't heard one serious theosophical idea
presented in this debate.  All I heard was criticism of HPB and the Teachers
with no valid counter arguments or alternative ideas presented logically or
from valid esoteric sources.
>Rich, you are probably referring to me Leon and myself here. One of the
>problems with discussions on the internet is that after a long and detailed
>discussion of some subject, a newcomer enters who begins it all over
>again.  I am, to be sure, tired of the constant arguments over good and
>evil, ethics and morality, etc that I have endured on this listserve. I
>blame it on HPB herself, who acted out of need in her puritanical world. I am
>still appalled by the blinders-on black-white good-evil worldviews of
>so many otherwise good and sincere Theosophists who should know
>better in today's world.  Oh well. I have given up on Leon, and now
>just respond in humor.  I have no bad feelings toward anyone (nor do you,
>I am sure) over any topic discussed.  Its not a personal thing, but rather
>I find myself at times responding emotionally to an outdated if not
>downright pathological  (according to modern psychology such black
>and white worldviews are distinctive of borderline personality disorders)
>worldview that as Theosophists I would hope we had all outgrown. And
>the outright fear and disgust at the subject of sex by today's Theosophist
>is enough to have Freud turn in his grave and most of today's
>psychologists would equate this with paranoia.  Under such conditions,
>having any kind of mature discussion on such topics is impossible.
>Theosophists read ad infinum about love and compassion, but it seems
>to me that many have very narrow views that border on neurosis.

As for this cop out. . .  The circle is now complete.  The one who started the
name calling and now the one who professes to end it--goes on and on without
let up.  What better way to defend oneself (even from an imaginary attack)
than to call the opposer (or is it "exposer"?) crazy. . .  And, of course,
prove by this, HPB's observation--(ref:  the "Freudian slip", "me Leon and
myself")--that one who criticizes another is usually exposing his own faults
and foibles.  (Don't you know paranoia usually accompanies schizophrenia?:-).
. .  At the same time, this also gives credence to my original point--that the
aim of this Tantra Sex "debate" (started by J.S., to be precise) was motivated
solely to "put the blame on Mame". :-)  If not, why is that always the bottom
line (at least from that side of the debate)?

Incidentally, I am no newcomer in this particular discussion (nor in many
other more scientific and reasoned forums concerning the nature of
consciousness and matter, which is also a concern of theosophy) but have been
"watching" here since long before it was introduced (by you know who).  And I
never would have entered it if I didn't hear some wrong remarks about Sexual
Tantra, as well as unfounded attacks against theosophy.  (Attacks later
directed at me, personally, for pointing out the errors)  I can stand a
reasoned argument to disprove a statement or an opinion I put forth, but a
bald "nonsense" without a valid counter argument, and thereby, implying the
writer is a fool, deserves whatever it gets back.  I enjoy a good sparring
match, whether on a personal or an intellectual level.  And certainly, if no
one wants to listen in they can always take your advice and trash these
letters.  (BTW, why didn't you, as you said you would?)  It also shouldn't
stop anyone from continuing their debates (so long as they keep personal digs
out of it--even to the dead ones.:-)

Seriously, though, What makes you think my observations about Dugpas have
anything to do with you personally, and why would my, as well as HPB's
discussion about the dangers and real untheosophical purposes of Sexual Tantra
have any reference to our (lumped together with "today's theosophists")
"puritanism" (whatever that means)--or that we have any "fear and disgust at
the subject of Sex"?  What has sex per se, got to do with commenting on
"dangerous ritual sexual practices"?  And where did you hear me (or HPB for
that matter) speaking about "ethics" or "morality" in relation to comments
about Tantra?.  So, it's apparent that your comments, steeped in inuendo and
personal attacks, are the most prejudicial and anti-theosophical remarks ever
heard in a supposedly theosophical discussion by a supposed theosophist (in
spite of your claim to be responding with humor).  So, the "proof of the
pudding is in the eating", as they say, and as we all now can see, "the shoe
fits".   Since you insist on continuing these personal attacks, you can see
that I don't mind joining in the fun and "calling a spade a spade".

The real joke here is the pot calling the kettle black.and in the processes
putting its foot in its mouth.  So, if you want to continue your "debate"
without interruption, watch what you say publicly about other people,
including dead ones who can't defend themselves.

Best regards,


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application