From teos9@aol.com Thu Mar 01 01:58:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Teos9@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 09:58:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 35440 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 09:58:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 09:58:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d10.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.42) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 09:58:13 -0000 Received: from Teos9@aol.com by imo-d10.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.a6.10a6690b (14374) for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 04:58:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 04:58:10 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 130 From: teos9@aol.com Hello Dallas, I have inserted a few thoughts refarding your comments below. Louis. In a message dated 2/28/2001 5:51:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, dalval14@earthlink.net writes: > > Dallas observes: > > One wonders how the study of theosophy can ever be called > "tiresome." I did not say that the study of theosophy is tiresome. I said that the polarized personalities involved in this unending debate about the correct or incorrect forms of theosophy is tiresome to many of us who have been listening to it for the last forty years or more. The constant rehashing of this matter saps valuable time and energy from the more important experience of free study and discovery. > If we seek truth, then we may use it as any other exposition and > do the tracing to true or false conclusions. > Would it not be better to say that the "tiresome debates" are > really aspects of our own effort? If we seek within that of > which we are a part (because it is universal) then some aspect of > our won nature is making up this attitude Is it useful? What > causes such a reaction? Can we determine this? This is just another way of saying there is a true theosophy and a false theosophy. H.P.B, Judge, etc., is proper theosophy and worth studying. Besant, Leadbeater, Bailey, etc., is wrong and not worth the effort. I suggest that any theosophy which can produce intuitional resonance and inspirational vision is proper and worth the study effort, pure and simple. > > In the meantime, are not all students going to follow their own > "path?" Why should anyone expect a group of students / members > to be patent copies of one-another? > > Is the real "debate" about principles, bases, and logical > conclusions, or is it about the "clash of opinions?" It's about both Dallas. For the personalities that involve themselves in these affairs have a complex of traits, characteristics and agenda's that they bring to the table, some open and obvious others more subtle and indirect. It has appeared to me, for some time now, that the "ongoingness of the debate" is the really important thing. For I have never seen an honest attempt at resolution and release. The damage that was done during the Besant/Judge/Krishnamurti/Bailey etc. splits, remains unhealed to this day. Each camp has its adherents and defenders and no quarter seems to be given. > > Saying one view or another concerning Theosophy by students who > followed HPB is only saying that they differ in their > understanding. We still have as a core center the presentation > of THEOSOPHY in its original words as written by H.P.B > > Who is afraid of approaching that? In any case in this > incarnation or some other one will come up against these basic > ideas. If we use and develop them now we will probably save > ourselves a lot of effort, and time. Karma presents us with this > opportunity. Do we seize it? Each decides for themselves. > There it is again. The inference is that if we explore other Theosophical writers and are illumined by them, the illumination will be impaired somehow because we did not get it from the correct source. Illumination, inspiration and Spiritual insight are conditions and experiences of our inner being. Their manifestation can occur without reading anything at all. or by reading everything there is. The incoming generations will have access to spiritual inspiration from a vast ocean of resources. How can we possibly judge the assimilative quality of another's life path? > It is valuable and instructive to note that H.P.B. says that the > words used to covey Theosophical doctrines and metaphysics > APPROXIMATE to the truth that lies in between the words, or > behind them as seminal idea. I conceive that we develop our > intuition as we seek to unravel the inner meaning that lies > behind the words. Also I think that THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE if > regularly used and read, and thought over -- as the moral link > between appearances and causes -- tends to develop in us this > abilit > > Best wishes, > > Dallas > With all that said, Let me state for the record that my first and enduring love, ARE the writings of H.P.B. The wisdom that I have found in her work has inspired monumental transformations in my understanding of the human journey. But I have also read most of the other theosophical works, adjacent to, contemporary of, as well as currently emerging. I for one, am able to find true theosophy resonating in many different places. Let the lines of division decay and disappear. Let us embrace everyone whose karma has brought them to ANY study of theosophy because one day that study may inspire them to do great things. There is much work to be done. This perrenial bickering between ORIGINAL and PSEUDO theosophy keeps us from it, in one way or another. Louis > ====================== > -----Original Message----- > From: Bart Lidofsky [mailto:bartl@sprynet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 5:46 AM > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy > > teos9@aol.com wrote: > > > > Some observations regarding Wes Amerman's reply below: > > > > Again, we revisit this tired old debate. Ever since the death > of the founders > > of the Theosophical Movement as we know it today, this battle > has raged on > > between the various interested parties. Who has the correct > interpretation of > > Theosophy and who does not! > > Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, > then one knows: > NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for > the > foreseeable future. > > Bart Lidofsky > From teos9@aol.com Thu Mar 01 01:59:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Teos9@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 09:59:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 2725 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 09:59:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 09:59:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m02.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.5) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 09:59:38 -0000 Received: from Teos9@aol.com by imo-m02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.3a.117a8fd0 (14374) for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 04:59:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3a.117a8fd0.27cf7781@aol.com> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 04:59:29 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Bart's statement To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 130 From: teos9@aol.com In a message dated 2/28/2001 9:41:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, bartl@sprynet.com writes: > Well, when one considers that the "secret doctrine" (the doctrine > itself as opposed to Blavatsky's book about the secret doctrine) is the > correct interpretation of Theosophy, then Blavatsky didn't have it, the > Mahatmas didn't have it, and certainly those who came later didn't have > it. Deeper and deeper we go Bart. How can we know if the actual "secret doctrine" is the "correct interpretation" if it's very secrecy, prohibits us from knowing anything at all about it? Louis From ringding@blinx.de Thu Mar 01 03:30:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ringding@blinx.de X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 11:30:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 56755 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 11:30:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 11:30:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.blinx.de) (194.115.26.35) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 11:30:40 -0000 Received: (from amavis@localhost) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA07691 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:30:39 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed from queue /var/spool/mqueue X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed by amavis with -C /etc/sendmail.orig.cf Received: from FrankReitemeyer (cppp-141.blinx.de [62.96.222.141]) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA07679 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:30:37 +0100 Message-ID: <008801c0a243$16266f20$f5de603e@FrankReitemeyer> To: References: <3A9BAF8F.22D173DD@sprynet.com> <008b01c0a1d9$7575bf40$c5de603e@FrankReitemeyer> <3A9DAF6A.6631E1EC@sprynet.com> Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:30:13 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-9 From: "Frank Reitemeyer" > >Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, then one knows: > >NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for the > >foreseeable future. >=20 > Bart, does that include also HPB and the Masters too? >Well, unless they are liars, yes. The same I heard last week in our local Adyar "Blavatsky (!)-lodge": No one= knows the truth and don't read the Secret Doctrine and the Mahatma Letters= . As the so-called Adyar TS rejects the truth at least since 1885 when they k= icked HPB out it seems that the Theosophists are in danger to become persec= uted by the dugpas WITHIN. As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way to it, then t= hey are liars according to your definition. Does that include also that the= Adyar TS is a fake TS and misuses the name, seal and motto? Why not honest= and rename it to Psychological Society? Furthermore, Bart, your statement sounds a little bit proud. All you can sa= y is that you don't know the truth. But how can you know wether others know= the truth? Is it not possible that there are people who know more than you= ? Or do you consider yourself as the crown of creation? Frank From sanctius@mail.com Thu Mar 01 06:35:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 14:35:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 58212 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 14:35:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 14:35:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep01-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 14:35:20 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep01-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010301143516.TLCL9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:35:16 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 14:36:37 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010301143516.TLCL9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com >Furthermore, Bart, your statement sounds a little bit proud. It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. >All you can say is that you don't know the truth. >But how can you know wether others know the truth? Let God alone know the truth. >Is it not possible that there are people who know more than you? It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. >Or do you consider yourself as the crown of creation? God loves equally all creation. -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From eldon@theosophy.com Thu Mar 01 07:14:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 15:14:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 11205 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 15:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 15:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pippin.imagiware.com) (205.254.196.9) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 15:14:05 -0000 Received: from SCRIBE.theosophy.com ([167.167.110.112]) by pippin.imagiware.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA22361 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:14:28 -0600 Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20010301071043.01d51040@pop3.norton.antivirus> X-Sender: eldon/theosophy.com@pop3.norton.antivirus X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 07:11:10 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: The March 2001 THEOSOPHY WORLD, HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST, and various lists Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Eldon B Tucker The March 2001 issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD is out. This is the 57th issue of the online theosophical monthly. See its page on egroups.com to read the issue and/or subscribe to it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-world mailto:editor@theosophy.com The monthly and its associated mailing list's archives are also online in html format, through February 1999. To view these pages, see: http://www.theosophy.net/tw.html The current issue contains: "Thus Have I Heard," by B.P. Wadia "Something About Katherine Tingley and Point Loma," Part I, by Iverson L. Harris "The Tower of the Gandharvas," by Kenneth Morris "Mortar of the Wall," by Victor Endersby "Grand Rapids Work," by Pete Stieler "The Hero in Man," by George William Russell "Spirituality Versus Intellectuality," by Boris de Zirkoff "The Satan Myth," by Henry T. Edge ---- The March 2001 issue of THE HIGH COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST is also out. See its page on egroups.com to read the issue and/or subscribe to it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/high_country The current issue contains: "Our Extraordinary Times and Extraordinary Beings" "One Reader Wrote" "A True Guru" "The Teacher" "Book Review, EXTRAORDINARY TIMES EXTRAORDINARY BEINGS" "SECRET DOCTRINE Question and Answer Section" "Man's Origin and Evolution" ---------------------------------------------------------- SOME THEOSOPHICAL MAILING LISTS * theos-talk@yahoogroup.com A general discussion for subscribers of THEOSOPHY WORLD magazine: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk ---- * mahat@egroups.com To present theosophical materials that go beyond the printed word, simple ascii text, and announce the availability of such. The most recent addition is a talk on the Winter Solstice given by Boris de Zirkoff. (The talk is an mp3 file that can be downloaded and played on one's home computer.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahat ---- * theosofie-groep@egroups.com In the Dutch language: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theosofie-groep ---- * theosophie-dialog@egroups.com In the German language: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Theosophie-Dialog ---- * blavatsky_study@egroups.com Where the focus is solely on the writings of H.P. Blavatsky: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Blavatsky_Study ---- * theos-l@list.vnet.net A free-for-all discussion of the pros and cons of theosophical ideas on a list dating back to 1993: http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l ---- * bn-basic@blavatsky.net A moderated (but large) introductory study: http://www.blavatsky.net ---- * bn-study@blavatsky.net A moderated (but large) general study: http://www.blavatsky.net ---- * bn-sd@blavatsky.net A moderated (but large) study of THE SECRET DOCTRINE by H.P. Blavatsky: http://www.blavatsky.net From ringding@blinx.de Thu Mar 01 07:34:51 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ringding@blinx.de X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 15:34:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 68007 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 15:34:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 15:34:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.blinx.de) (194.115.26.35) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 16:35:54 -0000 Received: (from amavis@localhost) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA11064 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:34:47 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed from queue /var/spool/mqueue X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed by amavis with -C /etc/sendmail.orig.cf Received: from FrankReitemeyer (cppp-174.blinx.de [62.96.222.174]) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA11044 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:34:44 +0100 Message-ID: <005601c0a265$30ba82a0$99de603e@FrankReitemeyer> To: References: <20010301143516.TLCL9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> Subject: Re: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:05:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-9 From: "Frank Reitemeyer" >Let God alone know the truth. There is no God. >It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. But it does matter in my eyes which is far more important. Frank From dalval14@earthlink.net Thu Mar 01 10:33:10 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 58620 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 18:33:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.120) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 18:33:05 -0000 Received: from earthlink (pool0361.cvx19-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.245.106]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA20634; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:33:01 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: RE: Theos-World Bart's statement Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:32:43 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3A9DB66A.B8FDF260@sprynet.com> From: dalval14@earthlink.net When in doubt study. H.P.B. gives all the information one could use if we decide to find out it is valid and useful. To depend on another's say so, is to have confidence in an authority unchecked, unverified. H.P.B. and ORIGINAL THEOSOPHY invite both study and checking, and demand no blind adherence, If you desire to know what THEOSOPHY teaches (as from the Masters and H.P.B.) then go to what they write. It is possible for anyone, as most of the texts are on line through BLAVATSKY.NET. But this study has to be done by the individual him or herself -- and one cannot (WITHOUT DANGER) rely on what any one else says. How can one know if the interpreter that one selects is reliable? Only by comparing what the write with the ORIGINALS. How else can one do it ? Dallas ================================ -----Original Message----- From: Bart Lidofsky [mailto:bartl@sprynet.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:40 PM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Bart's statement Well, when one considers that the "secret doctrine" (the doctrine itself as opposed to Blavatsky's book about the secret doctrine) is the correct interpretation of Theosophy, then Blavatsky didn't have it, the Mahatmas didn't have it, and certainly those who came later didn't have it. Blavatsky Archives wrote: > > Bart, > > I don't really know what your original statement > meant. See below. And your most recent statement > isn't any more enlightening. What is your > basic point. > > Daniel > > -- Original Message -- > > >Frank Reitemeyer wrote: > >> > >> >Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, then one knows: > >> >NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for the > >> >foreseeable future. > >> > >> Bart, does that include also HPB and the Masters too? > > > > Well, unless they are liars, yes. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------- > Daniel H. Caldwell > info@blavatskyarchives.com > --------------------------------------- > BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES > http://blavatskyarchives.com > Publishes rare & hard-to-find source > documents on Madame H.P. Blavatsky. > --------------------------------------- > SELECTED THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS FOR SALE > http://blavatsky.cc > --------------------------------------- > ESOTERIC WORLD OF MADAME BLAVATSKY > http://blavatskyarchives.com/esotericworld.htm > This new book contains a unique collection of > rare reminiscences of H.P. Blavatsky's life. > --------------------------------------- > Theosophyonthe.NET > http://theosophyonthe.net > Easy Net Access to the Classics of Theosophy > --------------------------------------- > You can always access our main site > BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES by simply typing > into the URL address bar the following > 6 characters: hpb.cc > > > > 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/ From dalval14@earthlink.net Thu Mar 01 10:33:16 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 59056 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 18:33:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.120) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 18:33:15 -0000 Received: from earthlink (pool0361.cvx19-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.245.106]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA21014; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:33:06 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: [bn-sd] Demiurgos - the aggregate of Dhyan Chohans Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:32:51 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: dalval14@earthlink.net Re: Memory No, not physical (brain ?) memory. That may be only one of the levels of memory and even then the physical brain stands only as a transmitter of the "need to know" to the ASTRAL BRAIN in which is the actual center of memory relating mainly TO THIS LIFE. It is the Astral Brain where those memories are impacted in apparently several layers, as experiments in hypnosis show that other and deeper memories are latent and through that process can be brought to the front -- and they are apparently more detailed and accurate than our ordinary memories. Theosophy teaches that there are "memories" associated with each of the principles under the Synthesizer ATMA (Spirit). In one place the ASTRAL/PHYSICAL brain memory is called the 7th and lowest aspect of the AKASA (Buddhi) in which all the records of all events in and outside of us are forever stored. In one way it is the basis for KARMA (individual and collective) and in another one might say that it is an inherent property of the MONADS and they can each mirror the rest at will (including their memories). A very interesting view, I think. Nothing is ever totally forgotten or hidden. Dallas ============================ -----Original Message----- From: PORT [mailto:nos@granite.net.au] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:11 PM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: [bn-sd] Demiurgos - the aggregate of Dhyan Chohans dal wrote: > 1. Mind (MANAS) the power to think, to decide, to remember >and to anticipate. Q: By remember are you referring to physical memory? nos Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From dalval14@earthlink.net Thu Mar 01 10:33:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 83873 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 18:33:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 18:33:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.120) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 19:34:26 -0000 Received: from earthlink (pool0361.cvx19-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.245.106]) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA21847; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:33:18 -0800 (PST) To: Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 10:32:55 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: dalval14@earthlink.net Dear friend: I agree with you that rehashing the matter of what it THEOSOPHY can be tiresome if one does not study what H.P.B. wrote -- those who debate then know only their half of the subject and not both -- and that makes comparison difficult I have participated in many such fruitless debates. If one is confronted with differences, one needs to find which of the positions is correct. I see no problem in that if the work is done. In no way is it of any use saying anyone is WRONG. Each has to find out for themselves. The splits in understanding and the healing effort if desired can easily be resolved by the study of H.P.B.'s system (taking that it is also from the "Masters") and others evolved by or after it. What are the differences? Why were they constructed Where do they lead (this has to be done on both sides, I think). We might be right or wrong. The real question is WHAT IS TRUE AND FACTUAL? Can this be discovered with the clues made available to us? I thoroughly endorse your last para. I agree that any differences will vanish if we seek to find out that which is useful, universal, true, and of assistance to all beings. We are all on the same great evolutionary path and our work or comments ought to assist. Best wishes as always, and thanks for the comments and views, they are not misunderstood. Dallas ================================ -----Original Message----- From: teos9@aol.com [mailto:teos9@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:58 AM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy Hello Dallas, I have inserted a few thoughts refarding your comments below. Louis. In a message dated 2/28/2001 5:51:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, dalval14@earthlink.net writes: > > Dallas observes: > > One wonders how the study of theosophy can ever be called > "tiresome." I did not say that the study of theosophy is tiresome. I said that the polarized personalities involved in this unending debate about the correct or incorrect forms of theosophy is tiresome to many of us who have been listening to it for the last forty years or more. The constant rehashing of this matter saps valuable time and energy from the more important experience of free study and discovery. > If we seek truth, then we may use it as any other exposition and > do the tracing to true or false conclusions. > Would it not be better to say that the "tiresome debates" are > really aspects of our own effort? If we seek within that of > which we are a part (because it is universal) then some aspect of > our won nature is making up this attitude Is it useful? What > causes such a reaction? Can we determine this? This is just another way of saying there is a true theosophy and a false theosophy. H.P.B, Judge, etc., is proper theosophy and worth studying. Besant, Leadbeater, Bailey, etc., is wrong and not worth the effort. I suggest that any theosophy which can produce intuitional resonance and inspirational vision is proper and worth the study effort, pure and simple. > > In the meantime, are not all students going to follow their own > "path?" Why should anyone expect a group of students / members > to be patent copies of one-another? > > Is the real "debate" about principles, bases, and logical > conclusions, or is it about the "clash of opinions?" It's about both Dallas. For the personalities that involve themselves in these affairs have a complex of traits, characteristics and agenda's that they bring to the table, some open and obvious others more subtle and indirect. It has appeared to me, for some time now, that the "ongoingness of the debate" is the really important thing. For I have never seen an honest attempt at resolution and release. The damage that was done during the Besant/Judge/Krishnamurti/Bailey etc. splits, remains unhealed to this day. Each camp has its adherents and defenders and no quarter seems to be given. > > Saying one view or another concerning Theosophy by students who > followed HPB is only saying that they differ in their > understanding. We still have as a core center the presentation > of THEOSOPHY in its original words as written by H.P.B > > Who is afraid of approaching that? In any case in this > incarnation or some other one will come up against these basic > ideas. If we use and develop them now we will probably save > ourselves a lot of effort, and time. Karma presents us with this > opportunity. Do we seize it? Each decides for themselves. > There it is again. The inference is that if we explore other Theosophical writers and are illumined by them, the illumination will be impaired somehow because we did not get it from the correct source. Illumination, inspiration and Spiritual insight are conditions and experiences of our inner being. Their manifestation can occur without reading anything at all. or by reading everything there is. The incoming generations will have access to spiritual inspiration from a vast ocean of resources. How can we possibly judge the assimilative quality of another's life path? > It is valuable and instructive to note that H.P.B. says that the > words used to covey Theosophical doctrines and metaphysics > APPROXIMATE to the truth that lies in between the words, or > behind them as seminal idea. I conceive that we develop our > intuition as we seek to unravel the inner meaning that lies > behind the words. Also I think that THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE if > regularly used and read, and thought over -- as the moral link > between appearances and causes -- tends to develop in us this > abilit > > Best wishes, > > Dallas > With all that said, Let me state for the record that my first and enduring love, ARE the writings of H.P.B. The wisdom that I have found in her work has inspired monumental transformations in my understanding of the human journey. But I have also read most of the other theosophical works, adjacent to, contemporary of, as well as currently emerging. I for one, am able to find true theosophy resonating in many different places. Let the lines of division decay and disappear. Let us embrace everyone whose karma has brought them to ANY study of theosophy because one day that study may inspire them to do great things. There is much work to be done. This perrenial bickering between ORIGINAL and PSEUDO theosophy keeps us from it, in one way or another. Louis > ====================== > -----Original Message----- > From: Bart Lidofsky [mailto:bartl@sprynet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 5:46 AM > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy > > teos9@aol.com wrote: > > > > Some observations regarding Wes Amerman's reply below: > > > > Again, we revisit this tired old debate. Ever since the death > of the founders > > of the Theosophical Movement as we know it today, this battle > has raged on > > between the various interested parties. Who has the correct > interpretation of > > Theosophy and who does not! > > Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, > then one knows: > NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for > the > foreseeable future. > > Bart Lidofsky > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From AnandaYoga@aol.com Thu Mar 01 12:03:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: AnandaYoga@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 20:03:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 15079 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 20:03:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 20:03:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 20:03:08 -0000 Received: from AnandaYoga@aol.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.c9.da43f6a (4565) for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 15:03:02 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 15:03:02 EST Subject: Purusha and Prakriti To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c9.da43f6a.27d004f6_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 352 From: AnandaYoga@aol.com --part1_c9.da43f6a.27d004f6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Peter, Deval, and Sanctuis, I am just reading my mail today. I wanted to thank you. I did not realize that Pantanjali or Taimni, believed in One God. This is foreign to me. I often miss the personal interpretations, and only hear what I need. Your clarification on the terms was very helpful. Also with Kapila and reseaching HPB's Key and SD, I am becoming quite enlightened! I had not thought of the universe becoming from the middle. This will be a wonderful meditation. I have also started exploring the spirit atoms, this seemed vaguely familiar to me and anything direction you have on this would again be appreciated. Thank you again, Ananda --part1_c9.da43f6a.27d004f6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Peter, Deval, and Sanctuis,
      I am just reading my mail today.  I wanted to thank you.  I did not
realize that Pantanjali or Taimni, believed in One God.  This is foreign to
me.  I often miss the personal interpretations, and only hear what I need.  
      Your clarification on the terms was very helpful.  Also with Kapila
and reseaching HPB's Key and SD, I am becoming quite enlightened!  
      I had not thought of the universe becoming from the middle. This will
be a wonderful meditation.  
      I have also started exploring the spirit atoms, this seemed vaguely
familiar to me and anything direction you have on this would again be
appreciated.
Thank you again,
Ananda --part1_c9.da43f6a.27d004f6_boundary-- From compiler@wisdomworld.org Thu Mar 01 12:22:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: compiler@wisdomworld.org X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 20:22:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 39738 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 20:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 20:22:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.rdc1.md.home.com) (24.2.2.66) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 20:22:06 -0000 Received: from wisdomworld.org ([24.3.34.114]) by mail.rdc1.md.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with ESMTP id <20010301202204.ICZW11526.mail.rdc1.md.home.com@wisdomworld.org> for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:22:04 -0800 Message-ID: <3A9EAF6D.50E5306F@wisdomworld.org> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 15:22:01 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Newcomers: Beware of New Age Razzle-Dazzle References: <20010228234103.XIRA16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Compiler sanctius: I have a firm conviction that you do Theosophy a great injustice by pointing everyone, especially newcomers, to Dr. Joshua David Stone and his wife, who are nothing, at least to this student, but fast-talking, hocus-pocus, razzle-dazzle, new-age spiritual DOT.COM money-grabbers and hustlers, putting out a lot of high-sounding nonsense, along with whatever may be true. After looking over their web page that you pointed us to, and reading some of their material, I can surely see why you relate them to Alice Bailey, but can in no way see any connection to the Theosophy put forward by HPB for the Adept fraternity, in service to humanity. I will not say any more, or answer you or anyone, after I post this, but leave it to you and others to reply, boil me in oil, hash out, and/or think about, in any way each cares to do so. My job, rather my duty, as I see it, is finished after simply posting this message for everyone to deal with as they will. This quote, from my introduction to the FREE compiled book on my web site, in my opinion, fits perfectly with what you have pointed us to and that you think is the "Cat's Meow", the top of the heap, so to say, of wisdom and knowledge: "...let me say that it is obvious to every dedicated and diligent student of Absolute Truth and Reality that the entire New Age Movement, so-called, has grown out of the original Theosophical re-presentation to humanity: All of its various teachings, ideas, concepts, methods, books, etc., are a huge mixed bag of truth, reality, mistakes, misinterpretations, misunderstandings, falsity, delusion, fantasy, ignorance, baloney, poppycock, wishful thinking, and so on. And because of this it is tough for a genuine seeker to tell the true from the false or the mistaken, to whatever degree...." Newcomers, I ask you to compare, simply as a "sample" of what true Theosophy is, the kinds of material that I have compiled on this web site, written by serious students of the Theosophy of HPB, with the kind of material you find in the link that sanctius provided to Dr. Stone's web site -- and then make your own choice as to which is the wisest to begin a deep study of: Here is the Wisdom World web site I refer to, and that I am the Compiler of: ===================== You may find a great deal of the Truth that you are searching for here: Wisdom World web site (Main Page): http://www.wisdomworld.org/index.html The page where "Additional" articles are steadily being added: http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/index.html John DeSantis (Compiler) ===================== ...and here is the message promoting Dr. Stone's web site: ------- sanctius@mail.com wrote: > It seems to me, that Dr. Joshua David Stone has been lately revealed > the complete doctrine of ascension with our old friends Sanat Kumara & > Djwhal Khul. In my opinion, every AAB lover should introduce themself > with this wonderful psychological viewpoint of Theosophy. So deep is > the intuitive effect I get with these books, that it feels I myself > have written them. These three, HPB->AAB->JDS, form an unbreakable > chain of wonderful triplicity of one truth. With JDS it is easier to > understand AAB, and with AAB it is easier to understand HPB! O:-) > > http://www.drjoshuadavidstone.com > > -- > Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. > http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From sanctius@mail.com Thu Mar 01 12:39:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 20:39:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 27424 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 20:39:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 20:39:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep02-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.44) by mta1 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 20:39:32 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep02-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010301203930.HNOT16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 22:39:30 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Existence of God Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 20:40:54 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010301203930.HNOT16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com Frank: >There is no God. Yes I am. The reason why God is answering as my existence, is the reason that there is but You questioning the existence of God. O:-) -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From sanctius@mail.com Thu Mar 01 14:02:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 22:02:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 46546 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 22:02:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 22:02:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep02-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.44) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 23:03:49 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep02-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010301220243.HVZJ16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 00:02:43 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Emotional healing Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 22:04:23 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010301220243.HVZJ16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com Compiler: >I have a firm conviction that you do Theosophy a great >injustice by pointing everyone, especially newcomers >to Dr. Joshua David Stone The cleansing and purifying effect coming from the PRESENCE of DK via JDS is Rather Awesome, don't you think? I still suggest not to be afraid of your own negative emotions as you are confronted by them. Step boldly forward and read but one book you so furiously oppose. Rememeber the violent opposition that Blavasky's presence raised in the negative egos of majority? She surely did not harm anyone, but almos everybody seemed to be after her blood. Remember Jesus, the innocent and loving man, what opposition HE raised with his vast aura? It is QUITE DIFFERENT when one faces a living person who is inside a powerful ashram of some Master, and someone who isn't. There is no way man can hide his dark side, when unstoppable love pours thru him. When I feel the presence of love, I start to cry. If I wouldn't cry, I would go and hurt people seriously. Of course, I can always restrain myself not to cry, but eventually that kind of pays it toll and kills ME. First emotionally, then etherically, then physically. From life to life it brings ME more suffering, until I cry every tear I pretended not to have. There is no way man can oppose the Love of God, and stay sane or healthy. >I will not say any more, or answer you or anyone Dear Compiler, you feel pain, and project it unto others. Don't torture yourself or others. I beg you, cry and be healed. Merge head with heart and make dead letters come alive within. With sixth ray of devotion as your dominant personality ray, it is never easy to follow two masters. But when one realizes, that every master is but ONE, the life reveals itself as pure joy of serving. >Newcomers, I ask you to compare, simply as a "sample" of >what true Theosophy is Perhaps there is a sample of Theosophy hidden somewhere in this very letter? O:_) -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From sanctius@mail.com Thu Mar 01 14:34:09 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 22:34:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 98924 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 22:33:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 22:33:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep02-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.44) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 23:34:41 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep02-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010301223334.HYRD16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 00:33:34 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Emotional healing Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 22:35:11 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010301223334.HYRD16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com >Of course, I can always restrain myself not to cry, >but eventually that kind of pays it toll and kills ME. I meant to write: "...eventually that kind of [action/behaviour] pays it's toll..." From revpam1@msn.com Thu Mar 01 14:54:46 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: revpam1@msn.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 1 Mar 2001 22:54:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 40398 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2001 22:54:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 1 Mar 2001 22:54:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (64.4.33.81) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2001 23:55:44 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 1 Mar 2001 14:54:40 -0800 Received: from 170.94.241.242 by pv0fd.pav0.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2001 22:54:39 GMT X-Originating-IP: [170.94.241.242] To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Newcomers: Beware of New Age Razzle-Dazzle Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 16:54:39 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Mar 2001 22:54:40.0008 (UTC) FILETIME=[98E77080:01C0A2A2] From: "Pam Wadsworth" I have to agree with Compiler that "Newcomers" need to beware not to lump Theosophy in with so much of the New Age glitter at our disposal. I also wanted to put my two cents in that discernment is so very needed when comparing the Bailey Teachings with some of those other organizations using somewhat of the same terminology. There are a lot of spin-offs out there attempting to be connected with the Bailey Teachings...and yet are far from it. Just because some leader spouts off words they have taken from the Bailey books...or from HPB...or from Christ...or Mohammed...does not mean that his/her organization is truly representative of those Teachings. To each his own, though....we all have our own respective barometers for what we discern as True and valid, and we have to develop those barometers ourself. We also need to have respect or at least tolerance for those students who differ from us in their choice of teachings. As for me....a student of Theosophy, AAB, and Agni Yoga...Dr. Stone's web site did not sound even remotely similar to the Teachings that I have been following for most of my adult life. At least not "my" interpretation of those Teachings. ----Original Message Follows---- From: Compiler Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Newcomers: Beware of New Age Razzle-Dazzle Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 15:22:01 -0500 sanctius: I have a firm conviction that you do Theosophy a great injustice by pointing everyone, especially newcomers, to Dr. Joshua David Stone and his wife..... After looking over their web page that you pointed us to, and reading some of their material, I can surely see why you relate them to Alice Bailey, but can in no way see any connection to the Theosophy put forward by HPB for the Adept fraternity, in service to humanity. ------- sanctius@mail.com wrote: > It seems to me, that Dr. Joshua David Stone has been lately revealed > the complete doctrine of ascension with our old friends Sanat Kumara & > Djwhal Khul. In my opinion, every AAB lover should introduce themself > with this wonderful psychological viewpoint of Theosophy. So deep is > the intuitive effect I get with these books, that it feels I myself > have written them. These three, HPB->AAB->JDS, form an unbreakable > chain of wonderful triplicity of one truth. With JDS it is easier to > understand AAB, and with AAB it is easier to understand HPB! O:-) > > http://www.drjoshuadavidstone.com > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com From sanctius@mail.com Thu Mar 01 16:38:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 00:38:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 85076 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 00:37:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 00:37:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep01-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.41) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 00:37:59 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep01-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010302003757.WMRP9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 02:37:57 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Newcomers: Beware of New Age Razzle-Dazzle Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 00:39:26 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010302003757.WMRP9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com Pam: >We also need to have respect or at least tolerance for those >students who differ from us in their choice of teachings. We need STUDENTS who ACTUALLY READ the NEW books, and AFTER doing that, POINT OUT the things that do NOT seem right. Is there ANYONE who can point out WHAT teaching in Dr. Stone's books are not quite right? One have to PROVE he is an unworthy charlatan, if one says so. I personally have PROVEN all my experiences true with Stone, Bailey and Blavatsky. I do not have found ANYTHING that fights my intution and experience, and I feel I have experienced to some extent what these three authors have written. Hope you all students have PROVEN something wrong before you say something IS wrong. Well, have you? After Stone's website, all eager "students" may well also go to www.acim.org, and judge that wonderfuld book "The Course In Miracles". But the book you just rated, is NOT on the website. Not everything is on the web. Yes, you actually have to BUY something sometimes. You might have to use MONEY even for some spiritual teachings. Why isn't every spiritual reading free to benefit mankind? I personally lose $30 every hour I write to this very group, as I could spend my time better by doing some computer programming. I usually write a lengthly article for an hour, until I am satisfied with it. There might be 2 new books in my table, should I have restrained myself writing this very article. If I wouldn't pay attention to any spiritual groups, my total income would probably raise at least 20%... This might come as surprise to some, but I think YOU ALL ARE WORTH OF MY MONEY! Interaction with living people is something money can't even buy. Now you know that I am willing to pay $30 per hour as I communicate WITH YOU. I am also willing to pay $15 for a Stone's BOOK, that provides me 100 hours of reading and very helpful spiritual information of my self. I still haven't found anything from this group that compares to any book I have bought. And STILL I am willing to pay hundredfold for my time with you. Ain't that amazing? I must be out of my mind... Better to retire this senile mind back to Arcturus... O:-) -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From bartl@sprynet.com Thu Mar 01 17:01:07 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 01:01:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 63589 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 01:01:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 01:01:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 01:01:05 -0000 Received: from sprynet.com ([64.24.46.139]) by escape.com ; Thu, 01 Mar 2001 19:56:08 -3736631 Message-ID: <3A9EF0C6.60DAE95E@sprynet.com> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 20:00:54 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Bart's statement References: <3a.117a8fd0.27cf7781@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky teos9@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 2/28/2001 9:41:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, > bartl@sprynet.com writes: > > > Well, when one considers that the "secret doctrine" (the doctrine > > itself as opposed to Blavatsky's book about the secret doctrine) is the > > correct interpretation of Theosophy, then Blavatsky didn't have it, the > > Mahatmas didn't have it, and certainly those who came later didn't have > > it. > > Deeper and deeper we go Bart. How can we know if the actual "secret doctrine" > is the "correct interpretation" if it's very secrecy, prohibits us from > knowing anything at all about it? Exactly. From bartl@sprynet.com Thu Mar 01 17:03:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 01:03:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 78257 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 01:03:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 01:03:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 02:04:17 -0000 Received: from sprynet.com ([64.24.46.139]) by escape.com ; Thu, 01 Mar 2001 19:58:21 -3736631 Message-ID: <3A9EF14A.1E3A7599@sprynet.com> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 20:03:06 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy References: <3A9BAF8F.22D173DD@sprynet.com> <008b01c0a1d9$7575bf40$c5de603e@FrankReitemeyer> <3A9DAF6A.6631E1EC@sprynet.com> <008801c0a243$16266f20$f5de603e@FrankReitemeyer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky Frank Reitemeyer wrote: > > > >Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas, then one knows: > > >NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for the > > >foreseeable future. > > > > Bart, does that include also HPB and the Masters too? > > >Well, unless they are liars, yes. > > The same I heard last week in our local Adyar "Blavatsky (!)-lodge": > No one knows the truth and don't read the Secret Doctrine and the > Mahatma Letters. Hey, just because you don't know the truth does not mean that you can't try to get closer. > As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way to it, > then they are liars according to your definition. Please tell me where they said that they knew the truth and the way to it. Bart Lidofsky From nos@granite.net.au Thu Mar 01 17:24:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: nos@granite.net.au X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 01:24:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 9864 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 01:22:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 01:22:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.granite.net.au) (203.132.126.6) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 01:22:56 -0000 Received: from nos (victor56k-17.granite.net.au [203.38.211.80]) by mail.granite.net.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA20186 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 11:54:24 +1030 To: Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: [bn-sd] Demiurgos - the aggregate of Dhyan Chohans Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 11:54:59 +1030 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 From: "PORT" '...the greatest enemy of spiritual memory being man's physical brain, the organ of his sensuos nature' - HPB SD III p60 -----Original Message----- From: dalval14@earthlink.net [mailto:dalval14@earthlink.net] Sent: Friday, 2 March 2001 5:03 AM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: [bn-sd] Demiurgos - the aggregate of Dhyan Chohans Re: Memory No, not physical (brain ?) memory. That may be only one of the levels of memory and even then the physical brain stands only as a transmitter of the "need to know" to the ASTRAL BRAIN in which is the actual center of memory relating mainly TO THIS LIFE. It is the Astral Brain where those memories are impacted in apparently several layers, as experiments in hypnosis show that other and deeper memories are latent and through that process can be brought to the front -- and they are apparently more detailed and accurate than our ordinary memories. Theosophy teaches that there are "memories" associated with each of the principles under the Synthesizer ATMA (Spirit). In one place the ASTRAL/PHYSICAL brain memory is called the 7th and lowest aspect of the AKASA (Buddhi) in which all the records of all events in and outside of us are forever stored. In one way it is the basis for KARMA (individual and collective) and in another one might say that it is an inherent property of the MONADS and they can each mirror the rest at will (including their memories). A very interesting view, I think. Nothing is ever totally forgotten or hidden. Dallas ============================ -----Original Message----- From: PORT [mailto:nos@granite.net.au] Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 6:11 PM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: Theos-World RE: [bn-sd] Demiurgos - the aggregate of Dhyan Chohans dal wrote: > 1. Mind (MANAS) the power to think, to decide, to remember >and to anticipate. Q: By remember are you referring to physical memory? nos 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/ From bartl@sprynet.com Thu Mar 01 17:28:47 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 01:28:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 32319 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 01:28:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 01:28:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 01:28:21 -0000 Received: from sprynet.com ([64.24.46.139]) by escape.com ; Thu, 01 Mar 2001 20:23:30 -3736631 Message-ID: <3A9EF730.63A63453@sprynet.com> Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 20:28:16 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Bart's statement References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky dalval14@earthlink.net wrote: > > When in doubt study. > > H.P.B. gives all the information one could use if we decide to > find out it is valid and useful. > > To depend on another's say so, is to have confidence in an > authority unchecked, unverified. Agreed. > H.P.B. and ORIGINAL THEOSOPHY invite both study and checking, and > demand no blind adherence, If you desire to know what THEOSOPHY > teaches (as from the Masters and H.P.B.) then go to what they > write. It is possible for anyone, as most of the texts are on > line through BLAVATSKY.NET. > > But this study has to be done by the individual him or herself -- > and one cannot (WITHOUT DANGER) rely on what any one else says. > How can one know if the interpreter that one selects is reliable? > Only by comparing what the write with the ORIGINALS. How else > can one do it ? Also agreed. Bart Lidofsky From sanctius@mail.com Fri Mar 02 01:21:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 09:21:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 19612 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 09:21:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 09:21:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep01-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 09:21:26 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep01-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010302092125.CYQ29973.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 11:21:25 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: The Truth is Out There Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:22:53 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010302092125.CYQ29973.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com >>As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way >>to it, then they are liars according to your definition. >Please tell me where they said that they knew the truth >and the way to it. I find it very healthy to think that EVERY writer has 50% truth in his writings. No more, no less, but 50%. I this way the literature doesn't become The Word of God and the blind faith due to the inexperience, can be avoided. In every book, there is 50% of truth, and the readers' mission is to FIND OUT what is the truth in those books. The rest 50% can be considered as unnecessary stuffing. If you believe more than 50%, one is in danger becoming blind. If you believe less than 50%, one is in danger becoming blind. The truth is in between the pair of opposites, and that is 50%. That remains, until one has become God, and thus knows the whole 100% of the reality. Yes, there is even 50% of truth in THIS writing. Wow! O:-) -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From alpha@dircon.co.uk Fri Mar 02 02:43:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: alpha@dircon.co.uk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 10:43:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 87786 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 10:43:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 10:43:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailhost1.dircon.co.uk) (194.112.32.65) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 10:43:53 -0000 Received: from default (th-en130-042.pool.dircon.co.uk [194.112.51.42]) by mailhost1.dircon.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA98439 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 10:43:51 GMT To: Subject: RE: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 10:45:14 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20010301143516.TLCL9022.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 From: "Tony" You write: <<>> Sheep follow. Isn't it about becoming the Master? Is there a Devil? If you believe in God, *then* there is a Devil. Or are you seeing it as you are the Devil, and you have to face yourself? Fight to the end of what? Finish what game? -----Original Message----- From: sanctius@mail.com [mailto:sanctius@mail.com] Sent: 1 March 2001 2:37 pm To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy >Furthermore, Bart, your statement sounds a little bit proud. It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. >All you can say is that you don't know the truth. >But how can you know wether others know the truth? Let God alone know the truth. >Is it not possible that there are people who know more than you? It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. >Or do you consider yourself as the crown of creation? God loves equally all creation. -- Follow the Master. Face the Devil. Fight to the end. Finish the game. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From nos@granite.net.au Fri Mar 02 03:46:20 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: nos@granite.net.au X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 11:46:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 48517 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 11:46:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 11:46:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.granite.net.au) (203.132.126.6) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 12:47:21 -0000 Received: from nos ([203.38.211.95]) by mail.granite.net.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA02149 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 22:17:45 +1030 To: Subject: RE: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 22:18:22 +1030 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <005601c0a265$30ba82a0$99de603e@FrankReitemeyer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 From: "PORT" isn't man god? nos -----Original Message----- From: Frank Reitemeyer [mailto:ringding@blinx.de] Sent: Friday, 2 March 2001 1:36 AM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy >Let God alone know the truth. There is no God. >It doesn't matter in the eyes of God. But it does matter in my eyes which is far more important. Frank Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From ringding@blinx.de Fri Mar 02 04:43:53 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ringding@blinx.de X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 12:43:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 91533 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 12:43:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 12:43:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.blinx.de) (194.115.26.35) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 12:43:51 -0000 Received: (from amavis@localhost) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA20363 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 13:43:49 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed from queue /var/spool/mqueue X-Authentication-Warning: mail.blinx.de: Processed by amavis with -C /etc/sendmail.orig.cf Received: from FrankReitemeyer (cppp-204.blinx.de [62.96.222.204]) by mail.blinx.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA20355 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 13:43:47 +0100 Message-ID: <00dd01c0a316$76b427a0$bbde603e@FrankReitemeyer> To: References: <20010302092125.CYQ29973.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 12:06:16 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-9 From: "Frank Reitemeyer" >>As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way >>to it, then they are liars according to your definition.=20 >Please tell me where they said that they knew the truth >and the way to it.=20 Look into "The Mahatma Letters" and Blavatsky Collected Writings and you'll= find it. Frank From 7Lights@heartgasms.com Fri Mar 02 04:58:54 2001 Return-Path: <7Lights@heartgasms.com> X-Sender: 7Lights@heartgasms.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 12:58:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 38224 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 12:58:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 12:58:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cobalt.avistacom.net) (216.229.161.226) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 12:58:51 -0000 Received: from rlloyd (san-175-033.modem.dmi.net [216.229.175.33]) by [216.229.161.227] (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f22Cwfv18217 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 04:58:42 -0800 Message-ID: <009c01c0a318$90228d60$1eafe5d8@rlloyd> To: References: Subject: Re: Theos-World Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 04:59:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "7 Lights" <7Lights@heartgasms.com> > Sheep follow. Isn't it about becoming the Master? > Is there a Devil? If you believe in God, *then* there is a Devil. Or are > you seeing it as you are the Devil, and you have to face yourself? > Fight to the end of what? > Finish what game? This is a perilous perspective. Don't be fooled. A half truth is twice as dangerous as no truth. No one 'follows' more than the Masters. Br. Ron From sanctius@mail.com Fri Mar 02 05:05:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 13:05:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 2865 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 13:05:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 13:05:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep02-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.44) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 13:05:28 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep02-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010302130523.ODIJ16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 15:05:23 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Pseudo-Theosophy Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 13:06:47 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010302130523.ODIJ16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com Tony: >Sheep follow. Be not afraid of the sheep, for they are harmless. Be afraid of those, who do not follow, for they may eat you. O;-) But seriously: "Understand that all channelers, event he best on the planet, are bringing information through THEIR personal information banks and belief systems... I don't mind repeating myself in cautioning you against anyone, no matter how high he/she claims to be or what powers he possesses, who uses any form of personal manipulation over you. This is simply not to be tolerated. There are far too many pure channels, spiritual counselors and healers in the world to settle for anything less than those who seek to aid you from the clearest, highest and purest place possible. Remember, you are ultimately your own master, higher self and monad, who is one with God. You are on the path of discovering the heights and depths of this oneness, but it is YOUR path. Therefore, I repeat, if anyone seeks to manipulate, dominate, control or instill fear in you, just walk away." Don't be blinded by the light! O:-) -- Personally, I don't believe a word I write. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From bartl@sprynet.com Fri Mar 02 05:56:21 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 13:56:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 17865 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 13:56:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 13:56:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 14:57:25 -0000 Received: from sprynet.com ([64.24.45.130]) by escape.com ; Fri, 02 Mar 2001 08:51:21 -3736631 Message-ID: <3A9FA67A.326E38BA@sprynet.com> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 08:56:10 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There References: <20010302092125.CYQ29973.fep01-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> <00dd01c0a316$76b427a0$bbde603e@FrankReitemeyer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky That's kind of like saying, "it's in a book somewhere". Frank Reitemeyer wrote: > > >>As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way > >>to it, then they are liars according to your definition. > >Please tell me where they said that they knew the truth > >and the way to it. > > Look into "The Mahatma Letters" and Blavatsky Collected Writings and you'll find it. > Frank > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From teos9@aol.com Fri Mar 02 06:16:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Teos9@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 14:16:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 14865 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 14:16:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 14:16:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d06.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.38) by mta1 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 14:16:29 -0000 Received: from Teos9@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.6e.8375be7 (14378) for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 09:16:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <6e.8375be7.27d10537@aol.com> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 09:16:23 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 130 From: teos9@aol.com In a message dated 3/2/2001 7:54:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, ringding@blinx.de writes: > >>As HPB as the Masters told us they know the truth and the way > >>to it, then they are liars according to your definition. > >Please tell me where they said that they knew the truth > >and the way to it. > > Look into "The Mahatma Letters" and Blavatsky Collected Writings and you'll > find it. > Frank Come on Frank. If you are going to quote H.P.B. and the masters, You are obliged to give at least the publications title, edition, and page that the quote can be found on. If you cant do that, your observations are not useful. Absent, giving the customary references, everything else should be considered your opinion. Not quite the same thing as a factual quote. Louis From info@blavatskyarchives.com Fri Mar 02 08:02:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: info@blavatskyarchives.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 16:02:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 46406 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 16:02:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 16:02:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail01.san.yahoo.com) (209.132.1.35) by mta2 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 16:02:23 -0000 Received: by mail01.san.yahoo.com (5.1.056) id 3A9414140036BB51; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 07:56:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3A94141800008D4B@mail01.san.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 08:56:09 -0700 In-Reply-To: <3A9DB66A.B8FDF260@sprynet.com> Subject: Re: Bart's statement Reply-To: info@blavatskyarchives.com To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Blavatsky Archives" Bart wrote: > Well, when one considers that the "secret doctrine" (the doctrine >itself as opposed to Blavatsky's book about the secret doctrine) is the >correct interpretation of Theosophy, then Blavatsky didn't have it, the >Mahatmas didn't have it, and certainly those who came later didn't have >it.=20 Bart, I still find it hard to know what you are actually refering to especi= ally when you write that "the Mahatmas didn't have it [the 'secret doctrine']." For those who are interested ponder some of what is said in THE MAHATMA LETTERS: "Our [secret?] doctrine knows no compromises. It either affirms or denies, for it never teaches but that which it knows to be the truth." Letter 10 "We do not bow our heads in the dust before the mystery of mind -- for we have solved it ages ago." Letter 10 "So far -- WE KNOW. Within and to the utmost limit, to the very edge of the cosmic veil we know the fact to be correct -- owing to personal experie= nce; for the information gathered as to what takes place beyond -- we are indebt= ed to the Planetary Spirits, to our blessed Lord Buddha. This of course may be regarded as second-hand information. There are those who rather than to yield to the evidence of fact will prefer regarding even the planetary gods as "erring" disembodied philosophers if not actually liars. Be it so. Everyone is master of his own wisdom -- says a Tibetan proverb and he is at liberty either to honour or degrade his slave --." Letter 22 "For the life of me I cannot make out how I could ever impart to you that which I know since the very A.B.C. of what I know, the rock upon which the secrets of the occult universe, whether on this or that side of the veil, are encrusted, is contradicted by you invariably and a priori. My very dear Brother, either we know something or we do not know anything. In the first case what is the use of your learning, since you think you know better? In the second case why should you lose your time?" "From the first ages of man, the fundamental truths of all that we are perm= itted to know on earth was in the safe keeping of the adepts of the sanctuary. Those guardians of the primitive divine revelation, who had solved every problem that is within the grasp of human intellect, were bound together by a universal freemasonry of science and philosophy, which formed one unbr= oken chain around the globe." HPB, ISIS I 37-38 "Believe me, there comes a moment in the life of an adept, when the hardshi= ps he has passed through are a thousandfold rewarded. In order to acquire furt= her knowledge, he has no more to go through a minute and slow process of invest= igation and comparison of various objects, but is accorded an instantaneous, implic= it insight into every first truth. . . . the adept sees and feels and lives in the very source of all fundamental truths -- the Universal Spiritual Essence of Nature, SHIVA the Creator, the Destroyer, and the Regenerator." Letter 31=20 For more relevant quotes see: http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/theosophy1.= htm Bart, you must have some meaning to what you are writing, some "mystical" or "esoteric" sense. Please share with us that meaning.=20=20 Daniel --------------------------------------- Daniel H. Caldwell info@blavatskyarchives.com --------------------------------------- BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES http://blavatskyarchives.com Publishes rare & hard-to-find source=20 documents on Madame H.P. Blavatsky. --------------------------------------- SELECTED THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS FOR SALE http://blavatsky.cc --------------------------------------- ESOTERIC WORLD OF MADAME BLAVATSKY http://blavatskyarchives.com/esotericworld.htm This new book contains a unique collection of=20 rare reminiscences of H.P. Blavatsky's life. --------------------------------------- Theosophyonthe.NET http://theosophyonthe.net Easy Net Access to the Classics of Theosophy --------------------------------------- You can always access our main site=20 BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES by simply typing=20 into the URL address bar the following=20 6 characters: hpb.cc From officerjenny@mindspring.com Fri Mar 02 09:46:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: officerjenny@mindspring.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 2 Mar 2001 17:46:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 6952 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2001 17:46:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2001 17:46:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Mar 2001 18:47:44 -0000 Received: from mindspring.com ([64.24.45.130]) by escape.com ; Fri, 02 Mar 2001 12:41:41 -3736631 Message-ID: <3A9FDC77.ECAD1CED@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 12:46:31 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There References: <6e.8375be7.27d10537@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Michele Lidofsky teos9@aol.com wrote: > Come on Frank. If you are going to quote H.P.B. and the masters, You are > obliged to give at least the publications title, edition, and page that the > quote can be found on. If you cant do that, your observations are not useful. > Absent, giving the customary references, everything else should be considered > your opinion. Not quite the same thing as a factual quote. Hi Louis, What I think Frank may be saying, and in my own experience, the Truth that is to be found in the SD and the Mahatma Letters can never be communicated to the discursive mind through the vehicle of any single 'factual quote'. Rather, through *continued* study and meditation on these writings, the patterns and framework of Truth contained therein (translated from Universal symbols into language symbols) RE-awaken, activate, and inform the dormant faculties which lie slumbering in the Inner Mind, the link to the Higher Self. *My personal belief* is that only these ORIGINAL COMMUNICATIONS are capable of enabling this transformation. Only these original communications have ADDED to our scientific/esoteric knowledge of the universe, and the information, far ahead of its time, has also stood the test of time. The rest, when critically examined, are comprised of variations and different formulations of previously available religious and moral themes. Michele From ramadoss@infohwy.com Fri Mar 02 16:56:01 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ramadoss@infohwy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 00:56:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 5057 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 00:56:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 00:56:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.infohwy.com) (207.90.192.3) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 00:56:00 -0000 Received: from senzar (max1-98.max1.sa.infohwy.com [207.90.224.98]) by mail.infohwy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ryanw-infohwy) with ESMTP id TAA05751 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 19:04:47 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010302190003.00a74f00@mail.infohwy.com> X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.infohwy.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 19:00:22 -0600 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: ePublishing Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: ramadoss@infohwy.com ... Good information. Still, anytime one deals with "any" publisher, "spiritual" or otherwise, there could be a lot of complications and/or confusion -- especially when the publisher is capable of being ruthless and financially strong and capable of spending a lot of money in prolonged litigating and has a culture of and track record of litigations in the past -- unless all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed in the contracts with the help of expert attorneys with contract and copyright expertise. Such professional help is expensive, but unavoidable and can provide sufficient grounds for contingent fee litigation should the rights of the author are violated. Usually the true colors of the publishers come out under contentious financial issues. Taking all these factors into consideration, I think, any day, publishing on the Internet would be a very attractive alternative any day. R.. At 12:00 AM 3/1/01 -0500, Theosophical News/Events Announcements digest wrote: >Subject: Re: Publishing in Internet Age - ePublication/eNews/eDiscussion >From: Bart Lidofsky >Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:00:13 -0500 > "Barnes & Noble has a vanity press where it only costs $99 to > publish a >book; it's put in the Ingram catalogue and made available via B&N >online. The basic idea is that it is up to the author to publicize the >book. " > > Bart Lidofsky From bartl@sprynet.com Fri Mar 02 17:48:25 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 01:48:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 88874 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 01:48:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 01:48:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO escape.com) (198.6.71.10) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 01:48:24 -0000 Received: from sprynet.com ([64.24.46.192]) by escape.com ; Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:43:00 -3736631 Message-ID: <3AA04D48.5E2D692B@sprynet.com> Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:47:53 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Bart's statement References: <3A94141800008D4B@mail01.san.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky Thanks for the sources. Some comments: Blavatsky Archives wrote: > when you write that "the Mahatmas didn't have it [the 'secret doctrine']." > "Our [secret?] doctrine knows no compromises. It either affirms or denies, > for it never teaches but that which it knows to be the truth." Letter 10 They are clearly aware of its existence. > "We do not bow our heads in the dust before the mystery of mind -- for we > have solved it ages ago." Letter 10 Which means they know some things. For example, they have verified the laws of the universe, but not beyond the edge of the solar system; they assume that the laws continue beyond that. In Letter 22: > "So far -- WE KNOW. Within and to the utmost limit, to the very edge of > the cosmic veil Which they identified in the previous paragraph as the edge of the solar system. > we know the fact to be correct -- owing to personal experience; > "From the first ages of man, the fundamental truths of all that we are permitted > to know on earth was in the safe keeping of the adepts of the sanctuary. > Those guardians of the primitive divine revelation, who had solved every > problem that is within the grasp of human intellect, were bound together > by a universal freemasonry of science and philosophy, which formed one unbroken > chain around the globe." HPB, ISIS I 37-38 Well, the Mahatmas did say that the Maha-Chohan knew far more than they did (which means that they do not know all there is to know). For example, K.H. in letter 9 (18 in the chronological book) is unable to "avoid feeling myself - uncomfortably so - like of worm of yesterday before our "Rock of Ages," my Cho-Khan." > "Believe me, there comes a moment in the life of an adept, when the hardships > he has passed through are a thousandfold rewarded. In order to acquire further > knowledge, he has no more to go through a minute and slow process of investigation > and comparison of various objects, but is accorded an instantaneous, implicit > insight into every first truth. . . . the adept sees and feels and lives > in the very source of all fundamental truths -- the Universal Spiritual > Essence of Nature, SHIVA the Creator, the Destroyer, and the Regenerator." > Letter 31 Note that they do not say that they, themselves, have reached it. In any case, we cannot take the Mahatma Letters as infallible statements of the truth; K.H. admits to carelessness in Letter #65 (136 chronological), when he apologizes, admitting, "I would never have allowed the passage to pass; nor the "Lal Sing" either foolishly invented as a half a nom de plume by Djual K. and carelessly allowed by me to take root without thinking of the consequences. We are not infallible, all-foreseeing "Mahatmas" at every hour of the day." In letter #55 (#130 Chrono), KH writes: "even an "adept" when acting in his body is not beyond mistakes due to human carelessness." Now, let's take the statement, "To be true, religion and philosophy must offer the solution of every problem." (View of the Chohan on the TS). Yet, the Mahatmas disagree on whether or not the Theosophical Society will be effective. In letter #11 (#65 Chrono), KH points out that there is disagreement on the part of the Mahatmas on whether or not the Theosophical Society will be effective; "But I am but one and you are many, and none of my fellow Brothers with the exception of M. will help me in this work". My point is not that the Mahatmas knew NOTHING, or that Ramtha is as good a source as they are. My point is that if even they were fallible, then those who came after them were certainly so, yet we should be careful about taking their works as the absolute truth. Bart Lidofsky From sanctius@mail.com Fri Mar 02 20:49:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: sanctius@mail.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 04:49:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 26449 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 04:49:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 04:49:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO fep02-app.kolumbus.fi) (193.229.0.44) by mta3 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 05:50:42 -0000 Received: from SANCTIUS ([193.229.161.115]) by fep02-app.kolumbus.fi (InterMail vM.5.01.02.00 201-253-122-103-20001017) with SMTP id <20010303044936.RHXA16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> for ; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 06:49:36 +0200 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: The Truth is Out There Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2001 04:51:09 GMT Organization: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sanctius_J=E4rvenp=E4=E4_Finland?= Reply-To: sanctius@mail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20010303044936.RHXA16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> X-eGroups-From: sanctius@mail.com (Sanctius) From: sanctius@mail.com Bart: >My point is that if even they were fallible, then those who >came after them were certainly so, yet we should be careful >about taking their works as the absolute truth. But what use is of the information, whether it to be true or not, when there is no way one can integrate it in his everyday life? There are QUITE FEW practical rules, which the lower self should obey, in order to find unity with the higher. It would be VERY helpful to all if more people would "confess" what teachings THEY find very practical in their everyday lives. Why study every gigantic "Ultimate Doctrine", when a fistful of words suffice? "Harmlessness, Forgiveness, Helpfulness, Openness..." I don't need The Map Of The Universe in order to understand those. I must only follow these words, until I AM those words. AFTER that, I KNOW The Map Of The Universe. -- The mediocre teacher tells. The good teacher explains. The superior teacher demonstrates. http://www.kolumbus.fi/sanctius/myself.html From ramadoss@infohwy.com Fri Mar 02 20:57:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: ramadoss@infohwy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 04:57:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 15953 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 04:57:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 04:57:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.infohwy.com) (207.90.192.3) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 04:57:14 -0000 Received: from senzar (max1-107.max1.sa.infohwy.com [207.90.224.107]) by mail.infohwy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/ryanw-infohwy) with ESMTP id XAA02674 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2001 23:06:02 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20010302225655.00a4cbd0@mail.infohwy.com> X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.infohwy.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 23:01:36 -0600 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There In-Reply-To: <20010303044936.RHXA16333.fep02-app.kolumbus.fi@SANCTIUS> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: ramadoss@infohwy.com in one of the books, Ernest Wood, had made an interesting statement. We tend to study and at some stage one becomes stagnant as we see no better understanding or "progress". According to him, the reason is that whatever that we have studied unless put into practice does not help up propel forward to the next stage of understanding or growth or progress. it looks like unless you integrate study with practical application, may lead to no where except head learning. R... At 04:51 AM 3/3/01 +0000, sanctius@mail.com wrote: >But what use is of the information, whether it to be true or not, when >there is no way one can integrate it in his everyday life? There are >QUITE FEW practical rules, which the lower self should obey, in order >to find unity with the higher. It would be VERY helpful to all if more >people would "confess" what teachings THEY find very practical in >their everyday lives. > >Why study every gigantic "Ultimate Doctrine", when a fistful of words >suffice? "Harmlessness, Forgiveness, Helpfulness, Openness..." I don't >need The Map Of The Universe in order to understand those. I must only >follow these words, until I AM those words. AFTER that, I KNOW The Map >Of The Universe. > >-- From teos9@aol.com Sat Mar 03 03:07:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Teos9@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 11:07:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 57043 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 11:06:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 11:06:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r13.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.67) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 11:06:59 -0000 Received: from Teos9@aol.com by imo-r13.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id r.33.116e4cbd (17084) for ; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 06:06:51 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <33.116e4cbd.27d22a4b@aol.com> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 06:06:51 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World The Truth is Out There To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 130 From: teos9@aol.com Hello Michelle, Yes, of course, Frank was referring to something that he had read, studied and intuitively processed. As do we all, who give part of our lives to exploring the world of esoteric philosophy. However, that is no reason to get sloppy regarding our communications here, on the Internet. When we participate in these discussion lists, we have no way of knowing for sure, the degree of past study anyone has given to the subjects at hand. From beginner to seasoned traveler, the common ground is clear indications between actual reference sources and personal opinion. It is the only way our readers can distinguish between accepting what sounds reasonable and plausible and deciding to do the research on their own. Of course we should all be reading the core material as often as possible. But as a courtesy to each other, and to save each other some valuable time, can't we help one another by giving text and page references that give support to our quotes or opinions. To ask one to read through HPB's Collected Writings or the Mahatma letters in order to find the support for a statement of fact or an opinion, seems a bit too much, to be reasonable. Your observation that the real work of Esoteric Studies goes on subjectively, non- verbally and intuitively gets no argument from me. I agree completely. However, the medium of communication that we are using here is objective, verbal and linear. In such an environment we are obliged to observe, however loosely, the simple rules of scholarship. Regards, Louis original message: In a message dated 3/2/2001 12:53:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, officerjenny@mindspring.com writes: > teos9@aol.com wrote: > > > Come on Frank. If you are going to quote H.P.B. and the masters, You are > > obliged to give at least the publications title, edition, and page that > the > > quote can be found on. If you cant do that, your observations are not > useful. > > Absent, giving the customary references, everything else should be > considered > > your opinion. Not quite the same thing as a factual quote. > > Hi Louis, > > What I think Frank may be saying, and in my own experience, the Truth > that is to be found in the SD and the Mahatma Letters can never be > communicated to the discursive mind through the vehicle of any single > 'factual quote'. > > Rather, through *continued* study and meditation on these writings, the > patterns and framework of Truth contained therein (translated from > Universal symbols into language symbols) RE-awaken, activate, and inform > the dormant faculties which lie slumbering in the Inner Mind, the link > to the Higher Self. > > *My personal belief* is that only these ORIGINAL COMMUNICATIONS are > capable of enabling this transformation. Only these original > communications have ADDED to our scientific/esoteric knowledge of the > universe, and the information, far ahead of its time, has also stood the > test of time. The rest, when critically examined, are comprised of > variations and different formulations of previously available religious > and moral themes. > > Michele > > From dalval14@earthlink.net Sat Mar 03 15:21:28 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 3 Mar 2001 23:21:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 77347 invoked from network); 3 Mar 2001 23:21:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 3 Mar 2001 23:21:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.74) by mta2 with SMTP; 3 Mar 2001 23:21:26 -0000 Received: from earthlink (pool0542.cvx19-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net [209.179.246.32]) by falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA04922; Sat, 3 Mar 2001 15:20:43 -0800 (PST) To: "m" Subject: RE: centralising intelligence, etc WHO ASKS? WHY WORRY ? Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 15:20:13 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C0A3F5.71E63080" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3A9E2F94.74C0024B@idirect.ca> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 From: dalval14@earthlink.net ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C0A3F5.71E63080 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Friday, March 02, 2001 Re: Centralizing Intelligence. How, Where, Why? How big? Dear M====,: I would say “the wider and the longer the search brings ultimately the best results.” Your continued persistence and devotion to your own progress has to bring results. But I think there is more to your quest than self-improvement. What about your relation with others, first those closest to you, and then the rest ? Are the answers you receive in any way satisfactory? Do they assist At all in self-evaluation? Are you wiser today than you were say, a year or so ago? One thing Theosophy puts forward as important to you is a survey of your reason for doing anything. Your motive counts all the time. Is it not a link between the physically oriented brain-mind of now, and the Mind that speaks to you from inside and says: “You have no boundaries except those you make. You are immortal. Make the most of the present life.” Of course you may reject that idea. But then of what value is all your querying and search and work? What is the final result? As to a “centralizing intelligence -- what size? How would it regulate the extremely small (sub-atomic) with the extremely large (to us) of the KOSMIC SCALES and GALAXIES ? Would such an INTELLIGENCE need deputies with plenipotentiary powers locate (in harmony with ITSELF) at many locations in the manifested UNIVERSE ? If so, then how would any such agents be selected and would they have regulated as well as regulatory powers? What criteria for performance would be envisaged for them prior to being trusted with supervision? Why is any supervision needed? Can the UNIVERSAL LAWS (if they exist) be twisted made into a discord and broken? What would be the results? What kind of being would have that kind of power? I find so many questions arising from your proposition, it is almost overwhelming -- one might need a MANUAL ON UNIVERSE MANAGEMENT preceded by a MANUAL ON GALACTIC AND SOLAR-SYSTEM MANAGEMENT, and prior to that, a MANUAL ON WORLD MANAGEMENT --and do on until one has to find a MANUAL ON SUB-ATOMIC PARTICLE MANAGEMENT. Of course if there are analogies between all these mythical manuals, then we need only refer to size and area to determine which is the most valuable. But we seem to be at the stage when we are just beginning to perceive the existence and need for such instruction on things already in place. Suddenly we realize that the UNIVERSE is not only SELF-GOVERNING but it has ALL THE RULES AND REGULATIONS ALREADY FUNCTIONING IN PLACE. We are just discovering some of them. In any case, if you have looked into some medical manuals recently on anatomy, physiology, etc.. you will be seeing how the human body, small in comparison to our world or Universe is yet a most complex harmony of heterogeneous structures each interacting and interpenetrating others so as to keep “us” alive and relatively well. But, as additional food for our thinking together, Let me give an example, which might be personal to you, and on the other hand it might really deal with me also, as well as with someone else: Do you really want to learn TRUTH ? Or do you merely want to be read and heard by many? Are you seeking to learn about your INNER SELF, or, do you wish merely to be kind of broadcasting machine: asking endless questions and not profiting from the answers? Who wins this contest? In the first case to STUDY means to consider and analyze everything. It is seeking the ROOT of the superficial and physical phenomena side of our day to day life and aspirations and plans. For everything -- a thought, a feeling, a desire, an impulse to act, and finally the action itself is moved from WITHIN each INDIVIDUAL. Of course he is affected by his present personality and this includes habits, culture, educations, parentage, heredity and a number of factors which science and psychology TRY TO UNRAVEL. They are still at it, and if they limit themselves to the superficial physical, it is clear to any true scientist that the final EFFECTS we start from in chemistry or physics, are only the result of ANTECEDING CAUSES which we have still to discover. Additionally, he (you, me and everybody else) is touched by all that surrounds him and impacts in and on his living. But while we are at it let’ s recognize again that our UNIVERSE is more of a COSMOS (run under and by universal laws) than a CHAOS which may be recognized in some parts of distant and seemingly nascent universes (as modern astronomy shows us) . I really enjoyed some of the pictures published in the past 3 years of these phenomena Let me draw another analogy. One approaches the center of Paris which is entirely covered with a dense fog or low cloud. Seemingly from beneath we see an object: It is the topmost floor of the Eifel Tower. Now, supposing we were trying the describe the Eifel tower with its enormous structure and complexity (which we may have seen) to another, when all one can see of it in this illustration is the very top floor -- and the rest is shrouded in almost impenetrable mists. All the necessary sub-structure has to be imagined or deduced from what one can see of the limited area and structure of the top. And furthermore one has to imagine the city of Paris, the Seine, and the country of France seated on our Earth. Our whole body of modern Science (which only BEGAN about 4 to 500 years ago), and has had tremendous development in the past 150 years in observation and speculative hypotheses and theories. It is constantly on the boil as fresh evidence emerges as relicts and fossils from the remains of past ages fixed in stone or sedimentary strata (useful for dating). Hence, if you will review the history of the theories evolved by Science to answer their concept of the causes that produced those as evidence of the past there is to be traced a continuous change and a deepening of the concept of time. When I went to school in the 30s man was supposed (if one went to Science and was not limited by the church dicta concerning the year of “creation”) to have evolved from the Ape about 40,000 BC. Now this has been pushed back to 2 to 4 million years. The history of past civilizations was then compressed. Now it is expanded, but no one has been fully able to get out of the limits imposed earlier by very much. One great unexplained stumbling block remains: EGYPT. Its artifacts show no gradualism in development. Suddenly it is there. Indian architecture and engineering of the past is likewise suddenly THERE. The Mayan civilization shows relicts and great architecture similar in some ways to both the EGYPTIAN and the INDIAN, and suddenly IT IS THERE. I use this to show how our Science speculates and then has to revise. One thing it need not speculate on are the rules and laws of chemistry, physics, atomics, astro-physics, mathematics, astronomy, biology (to the point it has so far discovered). But when we come to mind, psychology, virtue and vice, the rules of cohabitation, etc…, and the cause of man’s desire, determination, or avoidance of responsibility, we find everyone tripping, and arbitrary theories are established only to be torn down and then rebuilt. Why? But let us go a little further (I mean in the illustration of the top floor of the Eifel Tower: Someone designed it, and someone used it for a look-out point -- man and women can be seen walking about and peering into the mist below. The structure of steel implies ores, coal, factories and intelligent engineering work according to a master-plan. Chemistry, physics, engineering, mathematics, vision, thought, design, planning, imagination and an endless series of inter-relationships are to be deduced from this single structure seated above an impenetrable cloudy atmosphere (for the moment). [ Consider we might be trying -- in the context of Theosophical research into CAUSES -- to describe to one another the complexity of the 7 Principles of man and nature (S.D. II 596). Do they exist? Are they functional? Who or how were they established? What function do they perform in nature and in our own being? Etc., etc…..] Supposing we sweep away the cloud and reveal the size and measure of the tower, the river, the city, the surrounding country with its many urban and suburban facilities -- a visitor would be unable to at first understand the measure of the vast cooperative of France that has produced this thing. And so on and on. And why is our Earth in a small corner of the Galaxy (Milky Way) and why is the Milky way a remote and insignificant galaxy of a few milliard stars and planets in what seems the borderland of a desert in the starry Universe. Why all this? And where do we gather the intelligence, to see, perceive, deduce, imagine and finally seek for a beginning and an omnificent control? Evidence of “civilization” it may be, butt is there not inherent in it the motives of millions of humans all engaged is separate (yet ultimately harmonious) actions. Are they moved by ONE FORCE? Are they ruled by some “Centralizing Intelligence?” Are they puppets or are they free to choose how they act? It will always be a puzzle until such time as we realize that we are individually FREE to control our personal decisions, but we will always be united in our independent dependence on one another. Paradox? Yes and no. As much a paradox as the individual YOU/I asking and seeking for his/our beginnings and potential endings -- which, in a Universe that is dimensionless in time space and motion the sole stability of the INDIVIDUAL SPIRITUAL SELF which is ONE WITH THE SELF and the SPIRIT of all other BEINGS. He same essence unites us Whether we use the ideas exposed in THE SECRET DOCTRINE or not, the same kind of query develops when one reviews any ordinary appliance we casually use at home: a shaver, a toaster, the family car, an icebox, our jobs, education, medical support, the providing of food, the investing of funds for a security needed in ultimate retirement.== and so on and on. Such a study develops overall, into a study of the interactive cooperation that a BROTHERHOOD of all beings requires. This is so that we all may live together, perform various functions and, having developed the perceptive CONSCIOUSNESS we now have, we reflexly demand for the keys to an intelligent understanding of the ULTIMATE PURPOSE of our living. What is LIFE ? How did we get it? Where did we come from? What are we doing now that has continuing value? Will our efforts produce some value for us? Is there a future for our INTELLIGENCE (as we know that the materials of our form are constantly changing, and in 7 years will have been completely replaced. Medical and physical science says that the human body is replacing itself to the extent of about 98% EACH YEAR.). So the sense of EGOSHIP the sense of I, the demands of our desires and emotions, are all non-physical but reside in something hitherto undetected (though surmised as possible) . Theosophy of course having investigated this millenniums ago gives the facts, reasons and the process of self-investigation necessary for each of us to discover the meanings to these questions in ourselves as well as all around us in Nature and in our fellows. Well, that’s enough for the moment. Best wishes to you Dallas ================================== =============================== -----Original Message----- From: m - - - - - Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:17 AM Subject: centralising intelligence, etc Hi Dallas, sent this post to - - - - - - . Used your old email address so it didn't get to you. Then had second thoughts: reassessing my motives for sending posts to lists/people: I'm asking myself: why should I send posts privately to you, etc., (as that might be basically thought of as an imposition, in some way), when I could settle for first posting in one of the 3 discussion forums I'm signed up with (Theos-1, Universal Seekers, BN), and then just wait to see if anybody has anything to say about what I have to say? Not only that, but since your posts tend to reflect (as I see it) your points in a take-it-or-leave-it manner, only, basically, then the message that your approach tends to promote, after a while, is one that would seem to say, in effect, that everything you have decided to accept, in the way of worthwhile Theosophic knowledge, can be found referred to in some way somewhere in Theosophic literature: DTB Dear M: I agree that my answers have a certain “take it or leave it” tone, but that is only a reflection of my study. I use the best ideas or methods available, and then to those I add what I am able to understand. If you and I were discussing Geography (physical, not political) then we might argue over a LOCATION or a DESIGNATION. Along comes the space orbiter with its vary accurate cameras and depth sounders, and the cartographic record it depicts of an area we might be discussing is far more accurate than our (up to then) speculations. Are we going to use it or reject it because it does not suit our fancy? Or shall we adopt the data as verifiable FACT and TRUTH ? I use this analogy to try to get across to you the intrinsic value of the theosophical position -- it has one feature that is important: longevity and the thoroughness with which it has investigated every aspect of science, learning, etc… Perhaps it is this claim to universality that bothers you? Does it leave too little for you to work on? I say that the theosophical propositions deserve to be verified and tested for accuracy. But, first we have to know what they are. Without that study we are left with the simile of “one hand clapping in the wilderness,” or, the concept “ Was there a sound in the forest when a tree fell and nothing was near that could hear it ?” I find both quite useless as they are physically impossible and require perhaps a forum for consideration on some other plane than the mere physical. In other words, the impression, after a while, (which could, of course, be a very misleading impression, in reality), is that you have decided to substantially forego your own decision-making, original thinking, speculating, in favor of written Theosophic tenets, as if YOUR OWN ideas, regardless of what they might be if you gave them some free reign, were somehow irrelevant. DTB If you generate that kind of response to my many postings, then you have well misunderstood me. I rely on my own powers of consideration, thought, and the ability to try to put “myself in the place of another,” -- I THIN K FOR MYSELF. I admit I rely on the many great ideas that have come to us from past thinkers -- in the sense that we all STAND ON THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS. Does that make us slavish? I think not as the process of selection and examination precede any use of those concepts. I happen to have found Theosophy most encompassing and valuable. I seek to point out to those facts. Not to limit others to my way of speaking or writing, but rather that they too might profit from the contact. Of course I'm just talking about a general impression, mind you, from my perspective. Since I seem to be leaning toward the other extreme, in my "theosophic approach" (I'm super-tentative, casual, and tend to question EVERYTHING---as I see it), your highly contrasting approach seems all the more obvious to me. Could it be that a Karmic effect between us is promoting a middle-ground of some kind? DTB I would say a “middle-ground” is inevitable in all dialogue. Would you not say the world (or field) of ideas we all generate meet somewhere at or near the borderline of mutual contact? This may perhaps not be definable physically, but conceptually ? If it is possible for our “universe” extending out from us to the utter confines (if any) of SPACE to pass through that same territory that is crisscrossed by the energic and intelligent fields of others, it is inevitable that some coincidence and relationship is either enhanced or diminished. This does not inevitably affect our equanimity nor does it reduce the sense of “I-am-I.” ========= Subject: centralizing intelligence The words "centralizing intelligence" caught my interest in a recent post, so . . . here's another shot at the can: If self/Self-related/devised "Theosophic studies" (in concert with Karma, Skandhas, etc.) can take many forms such as, for example, extending theoretically between poles of: 1. efforts tending to lead toward increasing reliance on Lower Manasic aspects. 2. efforts tending to lead toward increasing reliance on Higher Manasic aspects. Seems that most individual theosophic study-efforts might include elements from both 1. and 2., so it would seem to me that the self/Self-related/devised study-aspect is a governing principle to the extent that it would seem to be Allowed ("Allowed" as if by some mandated higher principles---Dhyan-Chohans?---apparently, regardless of the direction it will take): Which would seem to suggest to me that, theoretically speaking, where Theosophic literary and self/Self studies are concerned, one is more or less constantly (as I see it) having to decide in some way, to some extent, between theoretical pole aspects, forms (rather than "extremes") of which might be such as: A/ reading and memorising theosophic literature passively with a minimum of self/Self-related interpretation and utilisation: In theosophic terms: minimising the Heart involvement. B/ making use of the literature in ways that seem more self/Self-related but with a minimum application of the Heart Doctrine. C/ making use of the Theosophic literature and the Heart Doctrine in ways that are more self/Self-related and applicable. Since theosophic studies would seem to promote SELF study, specifically, the "C"-type seriousness/sincerity, at whatever level, would seem to promote repeated self/Self-related/devised "theosophic" efforts, in various ways. In other words, theosophic studies would seem to essentially involve, for many, at whatever level, self/Self-related ("metaphysical") considerations about "missing links" (even Missing Links, possibly?) in self-relevant/theosophic ways, along with one's study of the theosophic literary aspects: The success of which study-process would seem to be in part determined by the extent by which one is capable of assimilating and making use of the various APPARENTLY LESS self/Self-relevant tangential elements in one's life, whatever they may be. (For example, US contributors have the choice of MAKING USE OF, or ignoring, criticisms directed at their post-content---even if they choose not to respond in writing.) Recently, someone asked, " Is there a centralisisng intelligence?" Seems to me as if progression toward higher Manasic states is linked to relevant-enough recognitions of centralising/Centralising and universic/Universal aspects/effects that are suggestive of "centralising intelligence" in various ways/levels, whatever the relevant aspects/effects might be (during the course of that progression toward higher Manasic states) that might have a centralising Karmic effect in the sense of focussed/theosophic individual efforts leading one toward aspects/recognitions of Centralised Intelligence or Universal Principles (whatever the "traditional Theosophic terminology" might be). So if forms of dependencies on forms of Uni-Centric Principles are seen to exist on various levels of life, the study of the nature of those dependencies might yield something worth while: Isn't that an important part in theosophic studies, ALONG WITH the theosophic literary studies? Mauri ps sorry about the lack of traditional Theosophic terminology in this post. Being a fairly new student of Theosophy, I'm learning about the terminology, I think . . ================ CUT ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C0A3F5.71E63080 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Friday, March 02, 2001<= /span>