theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

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

Re: Theos-World Meaning

Dec 08, 2002 06:57 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen


Hi Wry and all of you,

Allright Wry. You seem to mean well.

Please read all the following carefully:
But, as I see it, and let me put it plainly - just to make point, some here
at Theos-talk might get:

Wry, please try re-reading the email, which you posted - ( Sunday, December
08, 2002 5:41 AM) and which I first answered on.

The Bible in the present translations and editions are not a magnificent
book to read for the present upgrowning generations.
There are several problems with this book. Blavatsky has dealt with some of
them in her articles and books:
1. It is an old book.
2. It was a book created to a audience of the past, and NOT and audience of
the present.
3. It was written using only about 2 of the 7 keys used when writing
esoteric scriptures (try for instance H. P. Blavatskys book "The Secret
Doctrine" on the "7 keys".)
4. The present translations not only into english, but other languages - are
gravely misleading in content, - i.e. seen from a spiritual point of view.
Misleading in the sense, that it thrives on the idea of an eternal Hell.
Something I for sure and Theosophy (the wisdom teaching of all ages past)
for sure won't buy or support - year 2002. There are certainly NOTHING
magnificent about that !
5. The Bible is not helping the Planet creating a better future. The Bible
is a book of the past, and NOT the present. People need something new, a new
teaching, and not an old one, which has been so gravely misused.
6. The Bible as such is a SMALL book - and only 'a book' and not worth
dealing with, unless one has searched for Wisdom first.
7. To lead people in to an acceptance of a personal God is just no good. A
peacefull God is better than a aggressive western one.
8. The tendency which english speaking readers at Theos-talk is, that they
seem to support western views more than eastern ones. And indirectly
therefore also the Bible as it is supported today by The Christians, a
hidden agenda for a Crusade against other religions, - and especially those
not following the western lifestyles and thoughts on democracy and
devotional political campaigns, and personalizations. And those not
following the doctrine of the religious Church as having its place behind
the politicians - bowing in deep respect for their foolishness.

The following articles by Blavatsky could be worth while reading before one
starts (indirectly)supporting
the High Mass of popes:
A. "OCCULTISM VERSUS THE OCCULT ARTS"
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/OccultismVersusTheOccultArts.htm
"ATMA-VIDYA, a term which is translated simply "knowledge of the Soul," true
Wisdom by the Orientalists, but which means far more.

This last is the only kind of Occultism that any theosophist who admires
Light on the Path, and who would be wise and unselfish, ought to strive
after."

B. "BUDDHISM, CHRISTIANITY AND PHALLICISM"
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/BuddhismChristianityAndPhallicism.ht
m
"It may be said further, that "Black magic reigns over Europe as an
all-powerful, though unrecognized, autocrat," its chief conscious adherents
and practical servants being found in the Roman Church, and its unconscious
practitioners in the Protestant. The whole body of the so-called
"privileged" classes of society in Europe and America is honeycombed with
unconscious black magic, or sorcery of the vilest character."

C. "NOT A CHRISTIAN"!
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/NotAChristian.htm
"Nor do we find the sentence, "India owes too much to Christianity,"
anything but arrogant and presumptuous talk. India owes much and everything
to the British Government, which protects its heathen subjects equally with
those of English birth, and would no more allow the one class to insult the
other than it would revive the Inquisition. India owes to Great Britain its
educational system, its slow but sure progress, and its security from the
aggression of other nations; to Christianity it owes nothing. And yet
perhaps I am mistaken, and ought to have made one exception. India owes to
Christianity its mutiny of 1857, which threw it back for a century. This we
assert on the authority of general opinion and of Sir John Kay, who
declares, in his Sepoy War, that the mutiny resulted from the intolerance of
the crusading missions and the silly talk of the Friend of India.

I have done; adding but one more word of advice to the Review. In the last
quarter of the nineteenth century, when the latest international revision of
the Bible-that infallible and revealed Word of God!-reveals 64,000
mistranslations and other mistakes, it is not the Theosophists-a large
number of whose members are English patriots and men of learning-but rather
the Christians who ought to beware of "wanton aggressiveness" against people
of other creeds. Their boomerangs may fly back from some unexpected parabola
and hit the throwers."

D. "THEOSOPHISTS AND THEIR OPPONENTS"
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/TheosophistsAndTheirOpponents.htm

"We have not a

Mortal hatred for Christianity and its Divine Founder,
And the very Christian Herald tries his hand. It says:

Let us without any bias or prejudice reflect . . . about the Theosophical
Society . . . such a mortal degradation of persons [the Buddhist, ¬ryan,
Jain, ParsÓ, Hebrew and Mussulman Theosophists, included?] who can see
nothing good in the Bible . . . [and who] ought to remember that the Bible
is not only a blessed book, but our book [!].

The latter piece of presumptuous conceit cannot be allowed to pass
unnoticed. Before I answer the preceding invectives mean to demand a clear
definition of this last sentence, "our Book." Whose Book? The Herald's?
"Our" must mean that; for the seven thick volumes of the Speaker's
Commentary on the Old Testament* show that the possessive pronoun and the
singular noun in question can no longer be used by Christians when speaking
of the Bible. So numerous and glaring have been the mistakes and
mis-translations detected by the forty divines of the Anglican Church,
during their seven years' revision of the Old Testament that the London
Quarterly Review (No. 294, April, 1879), the organ of the most extreme
orthodoxy, is driven in despair to say:

The time has certainly passed when the whole Bible could be practically
esteemed a single Book miraculously communicated in successive portions from
heaven, put into writing no doubt by human hands, but at the dictation of
the divine spirit.

So we see beyond question that if it is anybody's "Book" it must be The
Indian Christian Herald's; for, in fact, its editors add:

We feel it to be no more a collection of books, but the book."
.....

"We have not a

Mortal hatred for Christianity and its Divine Founder,

-for the tendency of the Society is to emancipate its fellows from all
hatred or preference for any one exoteric form of religion-i.e., with more
of the human than divine element in it-over another (see rules); neither can
we hate a "Founder" whom the majority of us do not believe to have ever
existed. (3) To "retain" a "reverence for the Bible" one must at some time
have had it, and if our own investigations had not long since convinced us
that the Bible was no more the "Word of God" than half a dozen other holy
books, the present conclusions of the Anglican divines-at least as far as
the Old Testament is concerned-would have removed the last vestige of doubt
upon that point."




My view:
So Wry all books have value. But some books one should not just like that
and without further notice refer to as being "magnificent" to use your own
words in your 2nd last email on this issue.


To do ones best - is to follow ones conscience.
On could sort of think about that...
My conscience tells me, that there is something wrong with calling the
Bible - "magnificent".



from
M. Sufilight with some Middle Eastern rugrats with Soul Force...and
x-filebags...






----- Original Message -----
From: "wry" <wry1111@earthlink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Meaning


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-theosophy@adslhome.dk>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 1:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Meaning
>
>
> > HI Wry and all of you,
> >
> > Allright Wry. Try of the below have some taste:
> > The Christian Bible contains ONLY the use of a few - i.e. only TWO - of
> the
> > "7 keys" used writing books.
> > This is taken straight from The Secret Doctrine by H. P. Blavatsky and
> from
> > articles by her.
> > Blavatsky are talking about 'keys' and the use of them while writing
> > litterature.
> > So the beloved Bible certainly has problems with being - that -
> magnificent
> > as you think. The Bible doesn't contain - 'many' keys. And yet again it
> > certainly depends on what kind of 'keys' one is talking about.
> >
> > I have a distaste for the use of books which are misleading the present
> > genrations, and which year after year have been throwing people into a
> > direction of fanatic and ignorant attitude about the PRESENT realities
of
> > life.
> > Rethink your positions, please !
>
> Wry: I just used the Bible to make an illustration, as I suppose many on
> here know it, but, to me, though, this had nothing significant to do with
> the gist of my message, the bible is a great book, if you understand how
to
> use it.
>
> (big snip)
>
>
> > Feel free to do your very best... But DO something !
> >
> My best is radical and because I AM, there is an understanding of how to
> actually DO. Hope that this is not just a fantasy. Wry
>
> > from
> > M. Sufilight
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "wry" <wry1111@earthlink.net>
> > To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:41 AM
> > Subject: Theos-World Meaning
> >
> >
> > > What is meaningful to one is not meaningful to another because what is
> > meaningful is based on the conditioned mind, which is developed as a
> > movement away from pain toward pleasure. Perhaps when we become more
> > objective we will find a common meaning. Different people have different
> > tastes in reading. To me, discussing peoples tastes and preferences in
> > reading is not meaningful as there is little if any constructive
> information
> > to be received from it, though I was surprised to find the that many
> people
> > are spending their time reading material that to me is low quality and
> > simplistic.
> > >
> > > That is o.k., though. What saddens me is that many people on here do
not
> > seem interested in using a wonderful opportunity such as being in this
> group
> > to create a special force that will give us the focus and the courage to
> not
> > fritter our lives away in mechanical chatter. The day is not even over
yet
> > and I have already received thirty-two emails (ten with little if any
> > content from one cutesy (to others, perhaps, but not to me) person, and
> > this is not making my day more beautiful.
> > >
> > > There needs to be a certain kind and quality of suffering, which is
> > conscious and not mechanical, to decrystalize karmic formations. If this
> is
> > not a possibility, if it is too hard, then there needs to be a
dedication
> to
> > create an atmosphere where deep enquiry can flourish and where
inspiration
> > can be sparked.
> > >
> > > There too much ordinary life stuff on here to suit my personal taste,
> > though obviously others do not feel the same. Interesting and
intelligent
> > messages are watered down and weakened in affect by arguing, political
> > messages, and drivel. This is not o.k. I love you, but I do not like
your
> > behavior.
> > >
> > > If a such a thing as a "living master" exists, and he were to come to
> our
> > group, he would not stay here and work with us. But this is only my
> opinion,
> > a little person from the honey-makers, and who am I to say? Maybe I am
> > wrong. There is a saying, "from the manure pile grows a rose." But
there
> > are people on the internet who are SO serious. This does not mean that
> they
> > do not have a good laugh occasionally and roast each other with
wonderful
> > witty jokes, but they know when to stop and get down to important
> business.
> > In the meantime, There is WAR and people are getting tortured and burned
> up.
> > Please do not forget. The amount of human suffering is virtually
> > inconceivable. Do not pretend it will go away when you wish. Reading
cheap
> > fiction is one thing, but talking about it is another. It will rob us of
> any
> > dim possibility we may have of ever learning how to wish. To believe
> > otherwise is a grave "self" deceit. Turn the rock over and see what is
> under
> > it.
> > >
> > > SO, if you read the bible, you could be an ignorant fundamentalist who
> > takes sophisticated allegorical material on a literal level, or you
could
> be
> > a person of great wisdom who has unlocked some of the many keys and
> secrets
> > contained in this extraordinary and magnificent book, but I do not know
> > which person you are by you telling me you have read this or that book.
I
> > know you by your ACTS, as you know me by my ACTS, and by our ACTS we
will
> be
> > known. Sincerely, Wry
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>



[Back to Top]


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