From leonmaurer@aol.com Mon Apr 01 00:40:53 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 08:40:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 58588 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 08:40:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 08:40:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m09.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.164) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 08:40:51 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.f8.19160873 (3968) for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 03:40:46 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 03:40:46 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Superstrings Tantra and Blavatsky, and "nuts" ? 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 Mac sub 39 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 In a message dated 03/24/02 11:44:54 AM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes: >Well first of all that is your imagination regarding vehemence, >personally I take it rather lightly, and reg. the language you use >like calling other members on this list "crazy" or nuts as you >wrote, I think it is better if you stop projecting yourself onto >others as you seem to do , or ar you in fact a "mad" scientist ? Well, as a matter of fact I am... (Although, not mad at anyone in particular in this forum.:-) But, only in the sense that my scientific theories marrying metaphysics with physics seem "crazy" to those narrow minded people who cannot think for themselves, and need "authoritative" sounding references and quotes from so called "experts," while relying on the limited views of reductive material science to tell them what to believe or not believe about the true nature of reality -- which includes both consciousness and matter and all the "coadunate but not consubstantial" fields in between. So, I guess we are even. (They're "nuts" and I'm "mad" :-) ...And, I'll "stop projecting (my)self onto others" (whatever that means:-) when you stop projecting on us your hatred of theosophy, and drowning us in endless repetitive and non sequitur, selective exoteric mystical historical information that proves nothing about your denials of HPB's consistent metaphysical teachings -- which are backed up by modern science's Superstring/M-brane theory, and my ABC theory... Now considered as a valid paradigm by many scientists currently working in the field of consciousness studies -- who can't find reasonable answers (using their presently "accepted" scientific theories) to the hard questions of how to "explain conscious experience" and the "binding of mind to brain" -- (or, which came first, the chicken or the egg)? :-) Apropos, perhaps you should research the archives of the Journal of Consciousness Studies online forum over the past 7 years to see for yourself what I am talking about. Maybe, then, you will be a bit more careful when voicing your unfounded negative opinions about the scientific validity of my ABC theory -- which is consstent with theosophical metaphysics and its theoretical conclusions about consciousness, mind and matter, as well as reincarnation and karma deduced from its fundamental principles. Also, you might read Goswami, Amit. The Self-Aware Universe: how consciousness creates the material world. Tarcher/Putnam, New York. 1993 -- to find out the "hard time" modern physics is having answering the "hard problems" of consciousness. (Goswami teaches quantum physics at the University of Oregon.) LHM From bri_mue@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 02:40:48 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bri_mue@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 10:40:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 93715 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 10:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 10:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.73) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 10:40:47 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.165] by n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Apr 2002 10:40:47 -0000 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 10:40:46 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Superstrings Tantra and Blavatsky. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Length: 10762 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bri_mue" X-Originating-IP: 202.183.169.201 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=62965613 X-Yahoo-Profile: bri_mue Leon: "Goswami, Amit. The Self-Aware Universe: how consciousness=20 creates the material world. Tarcher/Putnam, New York. 1993 -- to find=20 out the "hard time" modern physics is having answering the "hard=20 problems" of consciousness." In fact I did read Goswami, but what he writes has not much to do with HPB as such.=20 In fact what you mention, "so above so below", that is from the Tabula=20 Smaragdina written in the 9th century and translated in Latin during the=20 Renaissance in Italy. But if you contantly interpret these historical = =20 as "hatred" it is no surprise that under these circumstances you can=20 also not get the real facts of the mathematics down, as you will=20 interpret these also as "hatred." That you don't want to study history=20 and see where the ideas you claim really came from is therefore your=20=20 2e problem.=20 Goswami has published several books presenting an idealist=20 interpretation of quantum mechanics, the best known being "The Self Aware Universe" . In 1996, Goswami and Henry Swift began publishing an on line bulletin called Science Within Consciousness,=20 carrying articles on idealist quantum metaphysics. In his publications,=20 Goswami presents two principal claims. Firstly, quantum physics is best explained within a framework that=20 hovers between idealism and neutral monism. More precisely, the=20 underlying "stuff" of the universe that, according to Goswami, is=20 revealed by quantum physics should be understood as consciousness. In=20 Goswami's terminology, however, consciousness is not the same as=20 mind, but an unknowable something that transcends both mind and=20 matter. Perhaps, in Berkeleyan fashion, one could interpret Goswami as saying that it is a transcendent consciousness that causes the properties of the macroscopic world to emerge. Secondly, he claims that quantum mechanics provides support for claims of a variety of paranormal phenomena. Psychic phenomena, such=20 as distant viewing and out of body experiences, are examples of what=20 he calls the non local operation of consciousness, which he attempts to=20 support by means of an unorthodox interpretation of the EPR paradox. It has been formally demonstrated that the seemingly coordinated=20 behavior of two particles at a distance implied in the EPR paradox=20 cannot be used to transmit information as this would be an attempt to explain an imperfectly instantiated paranormal phenomenon by=20 means of ad hoc hypotheis. Goswami's solution to this problem is to=20 invoke a principle of his own, which he calls downward causation by=20 consciousness. His idea is that consciousness collapses quantum waves=20 of possibility into actual events, and that conscious intention can=20 correlate two quantum objects. This would purportedly explain how, for instance, telepathy could be possible. Goswami's quantum metaphysics thus goes beyond the construction of=20 an idealist philosophy. In his publications and on line bulletins, Goswami = =3D=0D has invoked his interpretation of physics to endorse a variety of New Age=20 claims ranging from psychokinesis and remote viewing to channeling=20 and healing. We shall return to such uses of quantum metaphysics in the=20 following section. Goswami's own professed purpose is to show that=20 physics not only has suggestive parallels with Indian monistic idealism=20 (as Capra did),but to demonstrate that a philosophy of monistic idealism=20 is the only reasonable ontological framework within which it is possible=20 to make sense of the world of quantum mechanics. The rhetorical=20 strategies employed to do so are highly reminiscent of those found=20 in "The Tao of Physics". The idealism that Goswami refers to is a kind of "philosophia perennis" a popular idea during the Renaisance. As I=20 mentioned before this universalizing view of religion is constructed=20 by a liberal use of synonymization and pattern recognition. Thus, the=20 twin elements of the Indian concept of nama rupa, generally translated as "name and form", are assimilated to Western philosophical=20 and psychological terminology by being interpreted as "transcendent=20 archetypes" and "immanent form", respectively. See also my remarks=20 about John Dee and others of that period, Renaisance. The Hindu term brahman is explained as a synonym of the Christian Holy Spirit, and so on. The range of idealist philosophies quoted in support of Goswami's own thesis is far vaster than Capra's. In The Self=20 Aware Universe, there are references to Vedanta, Daoism, Mahayana=20 Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, Zen, Platonism, Yoga, and a host of other=20 traditions. Goswami's physics is equally unorthodox. The traditional=20 Copenhagen interpretation is explained in passing and the more upto=20 date theories of decoherence do not enter the discussion, whereas=20 theories that might support Goswami's own views are referred to=20 throughout his text .=20 It can be noted that recent statements of quantum=20 metaphysics share their perspective with other New Age popularizations=20 of the topic: the developments of the first forty years are=20 overemphasized at the expense of the advances of the last few decades. Goswami constructs the same straw man as Talbot in "Mysticism and=20 the New Physics"pp. 45 f., by claiming that the view of consciousness as an epiphenomenon of material (neurological)=20 processes reduces consciousness to the status of an illusion; "Self Aware Universe" p. 6 The argument may have had some validity during the time Of=20 behaviorism, but is out of place in works written in the early 1990's. Adopting such an idealist interpretation would, according to Goswami,=20 have much wider implications than just supplanting one view of the=20 world with another.=20 By embracing philo sophical materialism, the worldview underpinning=20 classical physics is also said to foster materialism in the everyday sense of the word, i.e. the wish to hoard possessions.Consequently,=20 quantum metaphysics is not only a way of understanding physical reality,=20 but ultimately a path to reconcile science and religion, make us accept the spiritual experiences, heal our alienation and, ultimately, effect a major social transformation: "If ordinary people really knew that consciousness and not matter is the link that connects us with each other and the world, then their=20 view about war and peace, environmental pollution, social justice, religious values, and all other endeavors would change=20 radically."(Goswami "Self =96Aware Universe" p. 8. This utopian agenda is central to Goswami's project.) In order to further his idealistic interpretation, Goswami, like others in the the quantum metaphysical genre that I mentioned in an=20 earlier posting to you (Leon), combines a view of physics shared with very few scientists with a description of Indian philosophy that is hardly defensible from a historical point of view. Rather then being a presentation of modern physics in any conventional sense, "The Se!f Aware Universe" appears to center on the need for spiritual transformation and the possibility of seeing the birth o= =3D=0D f=20 a new age. Significantly, paratextual markers in Goswami's The Self=20 Aware Universe contribute to labeling his work as neither a work of popularized physics nor a book on idealist philosophy, but specifically as = =3D=0D an example of New Age literature. The endorsements and comments on=20 the back flap are thus not principally those of fellow physicists, but of=20 New Age spokespersons healer Larry Dossey, an anonymous reviewer=20 from the Yoga journal. The preface is an endorsement by an even more=20 controversial quantum metaphysicist, Fred Alan Wolf, who became=20 known for his Capra like assertion that there are significant parallels=20 between modern physics and traditional shamanism.=20=20 = =3D=0D Bri. = =20 = =20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 --- In theos-talk@y..., leonmaurer@a... wrote: >=20 > In a message dated 03/24/02 11:44:54 AM, bri_mue@y... writes: >=20 > >Well first of all that is your imagination regarding vehemence,=20 > >personally I take it rather lightly, and reg. the language you use=20=20=20 > >like calling other members on this list "crazy" or nuts as you=20 > >wrote, I think it is better if you stop projecting yourself onto=20 > >others as you seem to do , or ar you in fact a "mad" scientist ? >=20 > Well, as a matter of fact I am... (Although, not mad at anyone in=20 particular=20 > in this forum.:-) But, only in the sense that my scientific theories=20 > marrying metaphysics with physics seem "crazy" to those narrow=20 minded people=20 > who cannot think for themselves, and need "authoritative" sounding=20 references=20 > and quotes from so called "experts," while relying on the limited views=20 of=20 > reductive material science to tell them what to believe or not believe=20 about=20 > the true nature of reality -- which includes both consciousness and=20 matter=20 > and all the "coadunate but not consubstantial" fields in between.=20 So, I=20 > guess we are even. (They're "nuts" and I'm "mad" :-)=20 >=20 > ...And, I'll "stop projecting (my)self onto others" (whatever that=20 means:-)=20 > when you stop projecting on us your hatred of theosophy, and=20 drowning us in=20 > endless repetitive and non sequitur, selective exoteric mystical=20 historical=20 > information that proves nothing about your denials of HPB's consistent=20 > metaphysical teachings -- which are backed up by modern science's=20 > Superstring/M-brane theory, and my ABC theory... Now considered=20 as a valid=20 > paradigm by many scientists currently working in the field of=20 consciousness=20 > studies -- who can't find reasonable answers (using their presently=20 > "accepted" scientific theories) to the hard questions of how to "explain=20 > conscious experience" and the "binding of mind to brain" -- (or, which=20 came=20 > first, the chicken or the egg)? :-)=20 >=20 > Apropos, perhaps you should research the archives of the Journal of=20 > Consciousness Studies online forum over the past 7 years to see for=20 yourself=20 > what I am talking about. Maybe, then, you will be a bit more careful=20 when=20 > voicing your unfounded negative opinions about the scientific validity=20 of my=20 > ABC theory -- which is consstent with theosophical metaphysics and=20 its=20 > theoretical conclusions about consciousness, mind and matter, as well=20 as=20 > reincarnation and karma deduced from its fundamental principles.=20=20 Also, you=20 > might read Goswami, Amit. The Self-Aware Universe: how=20 consciousness creates=20 > the material world. Tarcher/Putnam, New York. 1993 -- to find out=20 the "hard=20 > time" modern physics is having answering the "hard problems" of=20 > consciousness. (Goswami teaches quantum physics at the University=20 of Oregon.) >=20 > LHM From samblo@cs.com Mon Apr 01 02:44:39 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Samblo@cs.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 10:44:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 99344 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 10:44:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 10:44:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m07.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.162) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 10:44:38 -0000 Received: from Samblo@cs.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id 7.bc.242e458d (4534) for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:44:30 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:44:30 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Dallas's Solar Body. To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: CompuServe 2000 32-bit sub 107 From: samblo@cs.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=27151446 Leon, Thanks. Btw here are a couple of related events--one about Zero-Point Energy and another about the recent creation of a 4th State of Matter. Here is a link for a post about the 1st US Patent on Zero Point Energy Device awarded to Bearden and his partners : MEG Scalar Energy Device Patented - Production Starts Next Year and on the newly created 4th State of Matter: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm From bri_mue@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 02:55:32 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bri_mue@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 10:55:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 36329 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 10:55:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 10:55:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.80) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 10:55:32 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.164] by n24.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Apr 2002 10:55:32 -0000 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 10:55:29 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: =?iso-8859-1?B?UmU6IFRoZW9zLVdvcmxkIERhbGFz4oCZcyDigJxT?= =?iso-8859-1?B?b2xhciBCb2R5LuKAnSBQLjI=?= Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1491 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bri_mue" X-Originating-IP: 202.183.169.201 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=62965613 X-Yahoo-Profile: bri_mue Yes but here you are pulling something in again that has noting to do with the "occult sciences" or Renaissance alchemy or anything like that. These are two different things that are not justified to be mixed up from neither a mathematical and also not from a physics point of view. Just as much as "ether " to clean out wounds is not the same as either Einsteins "ether" or the "ether " in alchemy as prima materia. I think it is not fair to try and mix all of that into one pot, of course that is the problem with Theosophists, they try to do that, but I hope John you won't call it hatred if I point that out, I think also Theosophists can learn to be fair, and I know you are. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm Bri. --- In theos-talk@y..., samblo@c... wrote: > Leon, > Thanks. Btw here are a couple of related events--one about Zero- Point > Energy > and another about the recent creation of a 4th State of Matter. > > Here is a link for a post about the 1st US Patent on Zero Point Energy > Device > awarded to Bearden and his partners : > > MEG Scalar Energy > Device Patented - Production Starts Next Year > > > > and on the newly created 4th State of Matter: > > http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm From samblo@cs.com Mon Apr 01 03:07:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Samblo@cs.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 11:07:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 89763 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 11:07:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 11:07:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m07.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.162) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 11:07:10 -0000 Received: from Samblo@cs.com by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id 5.14b.b7f04ac (4534) for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:59:16 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <14b.b7f04ac.29d99783@cs.com> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 05:59:15 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Superstrings Tantra and Blavatsky, and "nuts" ? To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: CompuServe 2000 32-bit sub 107 From: samblo@cs.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=27151446 Leon, Apparently Brigitte failed to read the "Tewari" website I posted to the group weeks ago where he has posted information on his Over-unity Device. John From bri_mue@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 03:35:25 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bri_mue@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 11:35:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 6713 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 11:35:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 11:35:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.64) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 11:35:24 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.129] by n1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Apr 2002 11:34:43 -0000 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 11:34:39 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: To John Re: Superstrings Tantra and Blavatsky. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <14b.b7f04ac.29d99783@cs.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 387 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bri_mue" X-Originating-IP: 202.183.169.83 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=62965613 X-Yahoo-Profile: bri_mue What is the evidence there in your eyes, and how come ? Bri. --- In theos-talk@y..., samblo@c... wrote: > Leon, > Apparently Brigitte failed to read the "Tewari" website I posted to > the group weeks ago where he has posted information on his Over- unity > Device. > > John From adelasie@surfari.net Mon Apr 01 06:52:48 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: adelasie@cachecow.surfari.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 14:52:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 87223 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 14:52:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 14:52:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cachecow.surfari.net) (207.114.135.2) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 14:52:46 -0000 Received: from user (dsl37.surfari.net [206.190.81.37]) by cachecow.surfari.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA19356 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 06:52:44 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 06:58:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Theos-World the problem with theosophists Message-ID: <3CA804F8.247.1E1C927@localhost> Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.01) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body From: "adelasie" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=85128517 X-Yahoo-Profile: adelasie Yes, I guess that is the problem with Theosophists. On 1 Apr 2002 at 10:55, bri_mue wrote: > Yes but here you are pulling something in again that has noting to do > with the "occult sciences" or Renaissance alchemy or anything like > that. These are two different things that are not justified to be > mixed up from neither a mathematical and also not from a physics point > of view. Just as much as "ether " to clean out wounds is not the same > as either Einsteins "ether" or the "ether " in alchemy as prima > materia. I think it is not fair to try and mix all of that into one > pot, of course that is the problem with Theosophists, they try to do > that, They view life as a Unity, and seek to find correspondences whereby to understand the phenomena that surround them and pervade their lives. Accepting the Unity of all Life, and actiing accordingly, leads to awareness of the interdependence of all entities in manifestation, and thus to the responsibility of the individual. Seeking to separate and isolate concepts or anything else tends toward destruction. We can dissect the flower in order to discover what makes it smell so sweet, but we will never enjoy the broken pieces as much as we could enjoy the original being. Adelasie From adelasie@surfari.net Mon Apr 01 06:52:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: adelasie@cachecow.surfari.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 14:52:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 33517 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 14:52:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 14:52:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cachecow.surfari.net) (207.114.135.2) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 14:52:47 -0000 Received: from user (dsl37.surfari.net [206.190.81.37]) by cachecow.surfari.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA19360 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 06:52:45 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 06:58:00 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Is thought real? Message-ID: <3CA804F8.942.1E1C80F@localhost> Priority: normal In-reply-to: X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.01) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body From: "adelasie" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=85128517 X-Yahoo-Profile: adelasie Brigitte, That is the point, exactly: On 1 Apr 2002 at 2:00, brigitte muehlegger wrote: > > Bri.: Analytically, you can define any amount of dimensional space, > there could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, although such a > geometry might exist only in thought and not in the real world. But > apparently you can't read the mathematics. Thought is the real world, the function of creativity. Thoughts are things. All comes into manifestation from the realm of mind. The material world is the result of activity of the mental realms, not the other way around. Adelasie From bri_mue@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 10:53:18 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bri_mue@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 18:53:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 40491 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 18:53:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 18:53:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.91) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 18:53:18 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.158] by n7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Apr 2002 18:53:17 -0000 Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 18:53:14 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Is thought real? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3CA804F8.942.1E1C80F@localhost> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1776 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bri_mue" X-Originating-IP: 202.183.169.243 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=62965613 X-Yahoo-Profile: bri_mue Just to show how real thoughts are so that they even make people reach in their pockets to buy this book, look at this. Something that you might think has noting to do with Theosophy, but it has, showing how people can belief a lot of things even now, not only during the time of Blavatsky: The Frightening Fraud, by Thierry Meyssan, sold out its original run of 20,000 copies within two hours of going on sale. "We've sold 2,500 copies in 10 days, when a blockbuster novel sells maybe 1,500 in a month," a spokesman at Fnac Les Halles, one of France's biggest bookshops, said. "It's a phenomenon." Mr Meyssan's conspiracy theory argues that American Airlines flight 77, which killed 189 people when it smashed into the headquarters of the US defence department, did not exist, and that the whole disaster was a dastardly plot dreamed up and implemented by the US government. "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and everyone is happy" said Le Nouvel Observateur. Bri. ---In theos-talk@y..., "adelasie" wrote: > Brigitte, > > That is the point, exactly: > > On 1 Apr 2002 at 2:00, brigitte muehlegger wrote: > > > > Bri.: Analytically, you can define any amount of dimensional space, > > there could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, although such a > > geometry might exist only in thought and not in the real world. But > > apparently you can't read the mathematics. > > Thought is the real world, the function of creativity. Thoughts are > things. All comes into manifestation from the realm of mind. The > material world is the result of activity of the mental realms, not > the other way around. > > Adelasie From adelasie@surfari.net Mon Apr 01 14:39:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: adelasie@cachecow.surfari.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 1 Apr 2002 22:39:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 73420 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2002 22:39:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Apr 2002 22:39:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cachecow.surfari.net) (207.114.135.2) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Apr 2002 22:39:53 -0000 Received: from user (dsl37.surfari.net [206.190.81.37]) by cachecow.surfari.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA26783 for ; Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:39:52 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 14:45:10 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Is thought real? Message-ID: <3CA87276.19705.38D7B5D@localhost> Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: <3CA804F8.942.1E1C80F@localhost> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v4.01) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body From: "adelasie" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=85128517 X-Yahoo-Profile: adelasie I think everything has to do with Theosophy. In this case, you have provided an excellent example of the power of thought. A man got an idea (from where? we don't know, Theosopohy says from the mental plane, common to all humanity) and wrote a book about it, and there it is, a thought becomes a thing. The thought, the idea form, materialized ( without magic, just by the process of writing, publishing, distributing, through the agency of one person and the appropriate backup workers) in a form that can replicate the idea in the minds of many people, those who read the book, and even those, like us, who hear about the book, and therefore the idea. Whether this idea is worth believing or not is another subject which theosophy can illuminate. If one really wants to know, one owes it to oneself to investigate all available data. First hand experience is best, but if our investigator wasn't at the site of the event, and didn't see it on the news (if he did see it, then of course he has to decide whether to believe what he sees on TV) then he has only the information he can gather, and his own intelligence to help him figure out what really happened. But theosophy teaches that it is only useful to "believe" that which one has proven to his own personal satisfaction. So the theosophist may read the book you mention, as possibly providing some insight into what may have happened, but he will not "believe" what he reads until he can be sure that all the facts add up. Sometimes, there is a situation in which it is impossible to get enough information in order to make an intelligent determination, to discover what is really true. In this case, the theosophist withholds judgement, keeping the idea, whatever it may be, in mind, until at some future time the problem is solved, more "evidence" becomes available, and he can satisfy himself that he understands. Adelasie On 1 Apr 2002 at 18:53, bri_mue wrote: > Just to show how real thoughts are so that they even make people reach > in their pockets to buy this book, look at this. Something that you > might think has noting to do with Theosophy, but it has, showing how > people can belief a lot of things even now, not only during the time > of Blavatsky: > > The Frightening Fraud, by Thierry Meyssan, sold out its original run > of 20,000 copies within two hours of going on sale. "We've sold 2,500 > copies in 10 days, when a blockbuster novel sells maybe 1,500 in a > month," a spokesman at Fnac Les Halles, one of France's biggest > bookshops, said. "It's a phenomenon." > > Mr Meyssan's conspiracy theory argues that American Airlines flight > 77, which killed 189 people when it smashed into the headquarters of > the US defence department, did not exist, and that the whole disaster > was a dastardly plot dreamed up and implemented by the US government. > > "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and > everyone is happy" said Le Nouvel Observateur. > Bri. > > > ---In theos-talk@y..., "adelasie" wrote: > > Brigitte, > > > > That is the point, exactly: > > > > On 1 Apr 2002 at 2:00, brigitte muehlegger wrote: > > > > > > Bri.: Analytically, you can define any amount of dimensional > > > space, there could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, > > > although such > a > > > geometry might exist only in thought and not in the real world. > > > But apparently you can't read the mathematics. > > > > Thought is the real world, the function of creativity. Thoughts are > > things. All comes into manifestation from the realm of mind. The > > material world is the result of activity of the mental realms, not > > the other way around. > > > > Adelasie > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From stevestubbs@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 17:30:20 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: stevestubbs@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 01:30:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 67421 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 01:30:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 01:30:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web21408.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.232.78) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 01:30:17 -0000 Message-ID: <20020402013016.97509.qmail@web21408.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [209.245.235.108] by web21408.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 01 Apr 2002 17:30:16 PST Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 17:30:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Is thought real? To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Steve Stubbs X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=7712190 X-Yahoo-Profile: stevestubbs --- bri_mue wrote: > The Frightening Fraud, by Thierry Meyssan, sold out > its original run of > 20,000 copies within two hours of going on sale. > "We've sold 2,500 > copies in 10 days, when a blockbuster novel sells > maybe 1,500 in a > month," a spokesman at Fnac Les Halles, one of > France's biggest > bookshops, said. "It's a phenomenon." > > Mr Meyssan's conspiracy theory argues that American > Airlines flight 77, > which killed 189 people when it smashed into the > headquarters of the > US defence department, did not exist, and that the > whole disaster was a > dastardly plot dreamed up and implemented by the US > government. The French claim they are intellectually superior to everyone else on the planet. Until now we have seen no evidence of the validity of that claim, but the fact that this book and others on about the same level sell so well appears to constitute the missing proof. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover http://greetings.yahoo.com/ From bri_mue@yahoo.com Mon Apr 01 23:21:52 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: bri_mue@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 07:21:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 35043 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 07:21:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 07:21:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.76) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 07:21:40 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.168] by n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Apr 2002 07:21:40 -0000 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 07:21:39 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Free energy devices, an old dream. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1919 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "bri_mue" X-Originating-IP: 202.183.228.67 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=62965613 X-Yahoo-Profile: bri_mue samlo (John): Here is a link for a post about the 1st US Patent on Zero Point Energy Device awarded to Bearden and his partners." Bri.: Many poor souls have believed his claims, the claim overunity. That implies breaking the first law. Conservation of energy prohibits over unity. Why do you need to optimose the materials, even an efficiency of 1.000000000001 would be enough, and Naudin claims 1.75, whilst Bearden claims 5 . The title "Motionless Electromagnetic Generator" rather implies an antenna, doesn't it? Isn't this Hyper-light-speed antenna by D.L.Strom (2000) : US6025810 , the same patent that Strom used to show how bad the patent system was? The thing is a motionless magnetic switch that uses a permanent magnet, and the patents cited contain similar devices, many of which also incorporate PM's, an motionless switching and generation of electricity. But how can a magnetic switch exist, in which there are no moving parts, yet in which a permanent magnet can generate energy in coils without any mechanical input? And why no announcement to nature or science magazine ? Perhaps because of peer review ? Build the device and when you find that it doesn't work, then you found out something more again. Br. --- In theos-talk@y..., samblo@c... wrote: > Leon, > Thanks. Btw here are a couple of related events--one about Zero-Point > Energy > and another about the recent creation of a 4th State of Matter. > > Here is a link for a post about the 1st US Patent on Zero Point Energy > Device > awarded to Bearden and his partners : > > MEG Scalar Energy > Device Patented - Production Starts Next Year > > > > and on the newly created 4th State of Matter: > > http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm From leonmaurer@aol.com Tue Apr 02 00:46:12 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 08:46:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 79608 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 08:46:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 08:46:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m03.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.6) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 08:46:11 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.5f.25206eba (3965); Tue, 2 Apr 2002 03:46:06 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <5f.25206eba.29dac9cd@aol.com> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 03:46:05 EST Subject: Re: What does "coadunate' mean? To: Teos9@aol.com, 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 Mac sub 39 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 Louis, >From the American Heritage dictionary: co'ad'u'nate adj. 1. Closely joined; grown together; united. >From Merriam Websters Collegiate Thesaurus: Entry Word: coadunate Function: vb Text: Synonyms JOIN 1, associate, coagment, coalesce, connect, link, one, relate, unite, wed The statement "coadunate but not consubstantial" is attributed to HPB who used this phrase to describe the transcendent relationships of the seven fold fields of consciousness in both the SD and in her other writings on metaphysics. It refers specifically to both the zero (laya) points which, being dimensionless, are all in the same spatial location, or "entangled" (as they say in modern physic), as well as to the separate multidimensional fields of consciousness which are connected coenergetically through their zero points (where their energy rays cross and are transformed, or transmuted, from one frequency-energy "phase" or "order" to another). The differences in these frequency levels or "spectrum" ranges within the Planck distance surrounding each coadunate zero-point, are where the energy momenta and frequencies of the two adjoining fields (physical and astral) become chaotic and indeterminate due to their frequency and velocity phase interference's. That is why -- at the quantum level (the Planck distance of approximately 10^-32 cm from the zero-point) -- if the electron position is measured, its momentum is indeterminate, and if its momentum is measured its position is indeterminate. This is because the limit of measurement of the material instrument, or "observer", governed by the maximum frequency of electromagnetic waves on the physical phase or plane, cannot penetrate beyond the barrier of the Planck distance -- where the different frequency spectrums of the coadunate higher order energy fields interfere with each other and give chaotic measurements that science labels as the "probability" function, and which is wrongly interpreted by some shallow thinkers as negating causation and the immutable laws governing karma or "action" based on eternal cyclic motion reflected on every plane, field, or level of consciousness. Also, according to an extension of string theory mathematics, the velocity of astromagnetic light waves would have to be the velocity of electromagnetic light squared (C^2)... And, is why we can only see such light, internally with our "third eye," as "mental images" -- whether awake or dreaming. All that, incidentally, is also why theosophy can say (irrefutable by either science or logic), that the universe is nothing more than consciousness (or spirit) in motion, and that physical matter or mass-energy is but one low level aspect of a vast (3, 7, 10, 14, etc., fold) expanse of "coadunate but not consubstantial" energy fields ranging from the sublime to the gross... Or, ranging from the near infinite frequency spectrum of the primal at(o)mic field, through the five intermediate fields, to the gross, lower energy phase electromagnetic frequency spectrum of the physical, sidereal, or mass-energy field. Interestingly, M-brane theorists see the universe in a similar manner, and their open or closed "strings" (which, as they say, "vibrate like guitar strings of different tensions") are nothing more than the lines of primal force or emanative "rays" spoken of in theosophy. For a clear symbolic cross sectional picture of how these octaval (diatonically intervalic) coadunate fields (and their "chakra" centers or individualized zero-points of intersection) multidimensionally involve out of the "Absolute" zero point "spinergy" (or "abstract motion")... And, why all duality's are each integral or inseparable parts of a "trinity" which, when further differentiated, becomes septenary and then centenary -- but always remain an interconnected "unity"... See: http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html Hope this helps. Leon In a message dated 04/01/02 5:59:38 AM, Teos 9 writes: >Leon, > >I have looked in a couple of online dictionaries for the meaning of this >term. No listing for this word, is all I get. Could you please enlighten >me a bit about your intended meaning when you use the word. I get the part >about consubstantial or not consubstantial, as in: "the same as" or not >"the same as." However I am at a loss to glimpse, or infer any meaning >from "coadunate or adunate." Thanks for any help you can give e here. > >Louis From dalval14@earthlink.net Tue Apr 02 05:27:03 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 13:27:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 87747 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 13:27:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 13:27:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 13:27:02 -0000 Received: from pool0408.cvx11-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.189.153] helo=earthlink) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16sOJK-0005q4-00; Tue, 02 Apr 2002 05:26:55 -0800 To: "AA-B-Study" Subject: Studies in the Astral Plane and nature of Man: "Elementals and Elementaries" Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 05:19:13 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 Thursday, March 28, 2002 Re: Denizens of the astral Plane: ELEMENTALS Dear Friends: In our studies in the nature of the astral plane and the effect they may have interactively on the human "astral body" let us review together an article written y H P B on the "Elementals," ----------------------------- [Note: The text below has been extracted from a letter by H P B . D T B] ----------------------------- ELEMENTALS By H. P. Blavatsky I PERCEIVE that of late the ostracized subject of the Kabalistic "Elementaries" is beginning to appear in the orthodox spiritualistic papers pretty often. No wonder; Spiritualism and its Philosophy are progressing, and they will progress despite the opposition of some very learned ignoramuses, who imagine the Cosmos rotates within the academic brain. But if a new term is once admitted for discussion, the least we can do is to first clearly ascertain what that term means. We students of the Oriental Philosophy count it a clear gain that spiritualistic journals on both sides of the Atlantic are beginning to discuss the subject of sub-human and earth-bound beings, even though they ridicule the idea. But do those who ridicule know what they are talking about, having never studied the Kabalistic writers? It is evident to me that they are confounding the "Elementaries"-disembodied, vicious, and earth-bound, yet human Spirits-with the "Elementals," or Nature Spirits. With your permission, then, I will answer an article by Dr. Woldrich which appeared in your Journal of the 27th inst., and to which the author gives the title of "Elementaries." I freely admit that, owing to my imperfect knowledge of English at the time I first wrote upon the Elementaries, I may have myself contributed to the present confusion, and thus brought upon my doomed head the wrath of Spiritualists, mediums, and their "guides" into the bargain. But now I will attempt to make my meaning clear. Éliphas Lévi applies the term " Elementary" equally to earth-bound human Spirits and to the creatures of the elements. This carelessness on his part is due to the fact that as the human Elementaries are considered by the Kabalists as having irretrievably lost every chance of immortality, they therefore, after a certain period of time, become no better than the "Elementals," who never had any souls at all. To disentangle the subject, I have, in my Isis Unveiled, shown that the former should, alone, be called "Elementaries" and the latter "Elementals" (vol. i. p. xxx. "Before the Veil"). Dr. Woldrich, in imitation of Herbert Spencer, attempts to explain the existence of a popular belief in Nature Spirits, demons and mythological deities, as the effect of an imagination untutored by Science, and wrought upon by misunderstood natural phenomena. He attributes the legendary Sylphs, Undines, Salamanders and Gnomes-four great families, which include numberless sub-divisions-to mere fancy; going however to the extreme of affirming that by long practice one can acquire. That power which disembodied spirits have of materializing apparitions by the will. Granted that "disembodied Spirits" have sometimes that power; but if disembodied why not embodied Spirits also, i.e., a yet living person who has become an Adept in Occultism through study? According to Dr. Woldrich's theory, an embodied Spirit or Magician can create only subjectively, or to quote his words: "He is in the habit of summoning, that is, bringing up to his imagination, his familiar spirits, which, having responded to his will, he considers as real existences." I will not stop to enquire for the proofs of this assertion, for it would only lead to an endless discussion. If many thousands of Spiritualists in Europe and America have seen materialized objective forms which assure them they were the Spirits of once living persons, millions of Eastern people throughout the past ages have seen the Hierophants of the Temples, and even now see them in India, without being in the least mediums, also evoking objective and tangible forms, which display no pretensions to being the souls of disembodied men. But I will only remark that, though subjective and invisible to others, as Dr. Woldrich tells us, these forms are palpable, hence objective to the clairvoyant; no scientist has yet mastered the mysteries of even the physical sciences sufficiently to enable him to contradict, with anything like plausible or incontrovertible proofs, the assumption that because the clairvoyant sees a form remaining subjective to others, this form is nevertheless neither a "hallucination" nor a fiction of the imagination. Were the persons present endowed with the same clairvoyant faculty, they would every one of them see this creature of "hallucination" as well; hence there would be sufficient proof that it had an objective existence. And this is how the experiments are conducted in certain psychological training schools, as I call such establishments in the East. One clairvoyant is never trusted. The person may be honest, truthful, and have the greatest desire to learn only that which is real, and yet mix the truth unconsciously and accept an Elemental for a disembodied Spirit, and vice versâ. For instance, what guarantee can Dr. Woldrich give us that "Hoki" and "Thalla," the guides of Miss May Shaw, were not simply creatures produced by the power of the imagination? This gentleman may have the word of his clairvoyant for this; he may implicitly and very deservedly trust her honesty when in her normal state; but the fact alone that a medium is a passive and docile instrument in the hands of some invisible and mysterious powers, ought to make her irresponsible in the eyes of every serious investigator. It is the Spirit, or these invisible powers, he has to test, not the clairvoyant; and what proof has he of their trustworthiness that he should think himself warranted in coming out as the opponent of a Philosophy based on thousands of years of practical experience, the iconoclast of experiments performed by whole generations of learned Egyptians, Hierophants, Gurus, Brâhmans, Adepts of the Sanctuaries, and a whole host of more or less learned Kabalists, who were all trained Seers? Such an accusation, moreover, is dangerous ground for the Spiritualists themselves. Admit once that a Magician creates his forms only in fancy, and as a result of hallucination, and what becomes of all the guides, spirit friends and the tutti quanti from the sweet "Summer Land," crowding around the trance mediums and Seers? Why these would-be disembodied entities are to be considered more identified with humanity than the Elementals, or as Dr. Woldrich terms them, "Elementaries," of the Magician, is something which would scarcely bear investigation. >From the standpoint of certain Buddhist Schools, your correspondent may be right. Their Philosophy teaches that even our visible Universe assumed an objective form as a result of the fancy followed by the volition or the will of the Unknown and Supreme Adept, differing, however, from Christian theology, inasmuch as they teach that instead of calling out our Universe from nothingness, He had to exercise His will upon preëxisting Matter, eternal and indestructible as to invisible Substance, though temporary and ever-changing as to forms. Some higher and still more subtle metaphysical Schools of Nepaul even go so far as to affirm-on very reasonable grounds, too-that this preexisting and self-existent Substance or Matter (Svabhâvat) is itself without any other creator or ruler; when in the state of activity it is Pravritti, a universal creating principle; when latent and passive they call this force Nirvritti. As for something eternal and infinite, for that which had neither beginning nor end there can be neither past nor future, but everything that was and will be, IS; therefore there never was an action or even thought, however simple, that is not impressed in imperishable records on this Substance, called by the Buddhists Svabhâvat, by the Kabalists Astral Light. As in a faithful mirror, this Light reflects every image, and no human imagination could see anything outside that which exists impressed somewhere on the eternal Substance. To imagine that a human brain can conceive of anything that was never conceived of before by the "universal brain," is a fallacy and a conceited presumption. At best, the former can catch now and then stray glimpses of the "Eternal Thought" after this has assumed some objective form, either in the world of the invisible, or visible, Universe. Hence the unanimous testimony of trained Seers goes to prove that there are such creatures as the Elementals; and that though the Elementaries have been at some time human Spirits, they, having lost every connection with the purer immortal world, must be recognized by some special term which would draw a distinct line of demarcation between them and the true and genuine disembodied souls, which have henceforth to remain immortal. To the Kabalists and the Adepts, especially in India, the difference between the two is all-important, and their tutored minds will never allow them to mistake the one for the other; to the untutored medium they are all one. Spiritualists have never accepted the suggestion and sound advice of certain of their seers and mediums. They have regarded Dr. Peebles' "Gadarenes" with indifference; they have shrugged their shoulders at the "Rosicrucian" fantasies of P. B. Randolph, and his Ravalette has made none of them the wiser; they have frowned and grumbled at A. Jackson Davis' "Diakka"; and finally, lifting high the banner, have declared a murderous war of extermination against the Theosophists and Kabalists. What are now the results? FRAUDS A series of exposures of fraudulent mediums that have brought mortification to their endorsers and dishonour upon the cause; identification by genuine seers and mediums of pretended Spirit-forms that were afterwards found to be mere personations by lying cheats, go to prove that in such instances at least, outside of clear cases of confederacy, the identifications were due to illusion on the part of the said seers; spirit-babes discovered to be battered masks and bundles of rags; obsessed mediums driven by their guides to drunkenness and immortality of conduct; the practices of free-love endorsed and even prompted by alleged immortal Spirits; sensitive believers forced to the commission of murder, suicide, forgery, embezzlement and other crimes; the over-credulous led to waste their substance in foolish investments and the search after hidden treasures; mediums fostering ruinous speculations in stocks; free-loveites parted from their wives in search of other female affinities; two continents flooded with the vilest slanders, spoken and sometimes printed by mediums against other mediums; incubi and succubi entertained as returning angel-husbands or wives; mountebanks and jugglers protected by scientists and the clergy, and gathering large audiences to witness imitations of the phenomena of cabinets, the reality of which genuine mediums themselves -- and Spirits are powerless to vindicate by giving the necessary test conditions; séances still held in Stygian darkness, where even genuine phenomena can readily be mistaken for the false, and false for the real; mediums left helpless by their angel guides, tried, convicted, and sent to prison, and no attempt made to save them from their fate by those who, if they are Spirits having the power of controlling mortal affairs, ought to have enlisted the sympathy of the heavenly hosts on behalf of their mediums in the face of such crying injustice; other faithful spiritualistic lecturers and mediums broken down in health and left unsupported by those calling themselves their patrons and protectors-such are some of the features of the present situation; the black spots of what ought to become the grandest and noblest of all religious Philosophies freely thrown by the unbelievers and Materialists into the teeth of every Spiritualist. No intelligent person of the latter class need go outside of his own personal experience to find examples like the above. Spiritualism has not progressed and is not progressing and will not progress, until its facts are viewed in the light of the Oriental Philosophy. Thus, Mr. Editor, your esteemed correspondent, Dr. Woldrich, may be found guilty of an erroneous proposition. In the concluding sentence of his article he says: "I know not whether I have succeeded in proving the Elementary a myth, but at least I hope that I have thrown some more light upon the subject to some of the readers of the journal." To this I would answer: (1) He has not proved at all the "Elementary a myth," since the Elementaries are, with a few exceptions, the earth-bound guides and Spirits in which he believes, together with every other Spiritualist. (2) Instead of throwing light upon the subject, the Doctor has but darkened it the more. (3) Such explanations and careless exposures do the greatest harm to the future of Spiritualism, and greatly serve to retard its progress by teaching its adherents that they have nothing more to learn. Sincerely hoping that I have not trespassed too much on the columns of your esteemed journal, allow me to sign myself, dear sir, Yours respectfully, H. P. BLAVATSKY, Corresponding Secretary of the Theosophical Society. New York. >From The Religio-Philosophical Journal, Nov. 17th, 1877. [Reprinted in: MODERN PANARION p. 146, 152.] ============================ Offered by: Dallas From dalval14@earthlink.net Tue Apr 02 05:28:15 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 13:28:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 18320 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 13:28:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 13:28:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 13:28:14 -0000 Received: from pool0408.cvx11-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.189.153] helo=earthlink) by swan.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16sOKZ-0005q4-00; Tue, 02 Apr 2002 05:28:11 -0800 To: Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: Is thought real? Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 05:20:38 -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) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 In-Reply-To: <3CA87276.19705.38D7B5D@localhost> From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 04/02/2002 2:51 AM Dear Adelasie: I am in agreement with what you send. However, in matters involving Theosophy, we have the basic principles as in the 3 Fundamentals. (S D I pp. 14 -19 ) These are offered to us after Universal Symbology and its derivations are discussed (S D I pp. 4 -7 ) H P B says (still earlier) that the whole of the philosophy of Theosophy can be expressed in a "few pages of signs and glyphs." As far as I can see, it is true. And, I think those give us adequate guidance to cover the moral and ethical side of any proposition or question. They also imply the Laws of evolution, the rationale of reincarnation and the "goal" which all have as a common aim: Universal and SUPREME, Divine Perfection. If one desires to pass to expositions of other basics in Theosophy then, one might take into account the 7 Principles as given in S D I 157, and II 598 (human as corresponding to the Kosmic ones). So we have, as said in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY (HPB) p. 231: 1. UNIVERSAL UNITY AND CAUSATION 2. HUMAN SOLIDARITY 3. KARMA 4. REINCARNATION As thee are the links in the golden chain that makes the Philosophy of the rational explanation of things complete. Nothing can be found "outside" of these. There is no "Personal" or Extra-Kosmic "God." There is no favoritism. "Prayer" and "petition" are indeed selfish forces, and their action is limited by our Karma. But the response, if any, is not from a "God" -- especially not from one who is whimsical, petty, revengeful, and vain. DEITY or "God" is NATURE -- omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient. No wonder the "Churches" and the "temples," and the hierarchies of priests of all kinds hate Theosophy -- it allows those who are bold free thinkers to escape the dogmatic net of ignorance, fear, belief and faith. It eliminate any "authority" but one's own perception and conscience. And no one is permitted to dominate over others. The true ruler is always within. "Look inward, Thou art Buddha." says the VOICE OF THE SILENCE . But no one can be a "bold free-thinker" unless they adopt the principles of impersonality, impartiality and universality in all they think and discuss. And, most important of all consider themselves in their innermost SELF to be an IMMORTAL PILGRIM ever proceeding on the arduous paths of self-development and learning. There is no such thing as "chance." There is no such thing as a "gift" which we have not struggled to learn and acquire. There is no self-progress, unless we try to "give it away." As a dominant undertone to all we can safely say that "common-sense" always prevails. No one "owns the TRUTH." It is free and universal. But one has to work hard to acquire a knowledge of it. If one desires a definition of "truth" then we can say that it remains unchanged and identical, regardless of time, space or person. We have to start with the fact that we know WE EXIST, then pass to admitting the UNIVERSE all around us also exists. And 3, that there is a constant give and take between us (as unitary perceivers and actors) and the Universe as a plane (or planes) of action and of reaction; but, above all, it (the Universe, our Earth) is always a base of impersonal support, interaction and cooperation. We are therefore never totally isolated, or alone and selfishness is a mental construct that is incorrect because we depend in all ways on the generosity and the charity of others for our living. It is a law that every aspect of nature sacrifices itself at some time for the continued living of others. Inn our bodies the "cells" continually immolate themselves for the preservation of the entire entity -- our body. NATURE or DEITY supports and nurtures us all. The basic Unit is the immortal Monad. Every "Atom" is made up of uncountable monads in cooperative action. It is for us to discover the cause and the methods of this teeming life of interacting units that forever assist one another in creating what our minds tell us, is the "maya (illusion) of material and corporate existence. It is the Mind, behind and within the "form" that is significant. The body is only a shell assembled by Nature and Karma to provide the Mind with a dwelling place. We, therefore are miniatures, replicas in potency of all the vast POTENTIALS, POWERS, and FORCES that belong to the Universality of all DEIFIC NATURE. The SECRET DOCTRINE calls us the microcosms and the replicas of the MACROCOSMOS. No wonder that Jesus is reported to saying " I and my Father are One." Every man woman and child on Earth, or anywhere else can say the same thing. It is true. As undying "Gods" veiled in substance and matter we meet and live with each-other. As "Gods" in essence we incarnate into these limiting forms for the purpose of assisting them to achieve the level of SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS that is ours. While, we employed in this assistance, constantly widen out to the Universal and the Eternal and verify for ourselves the propositions, the basics and the fundamentals of THEOSOPHY -- which is no more than a series of statements of facts in Nature. We need, from time to time to review such a statement and verify its logic. Then partisanship and parochialism fade and vanish. We become generalists and universalists, and are able to support and encourage all truly "good" movements for our Earth and mankind as a whole. Best wishes, as always, Dallas -----Original Message----- From: adelasie [mailto:adelasie@surfari.net] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 2:45 PM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Is thought real? I think everything has to do with Theosophy. In this case, you have provided an excellent example of the power of thought. A man got an idea (from where? we don't know, Theosopohy says from the mental plane, common to all humanity) and wrote a book about it, and there it is, a thought becomes a thing. The thought, the idea form, materialized ( without magic, just by the process of writing, publishing, distributing, through the agency of one person and the appropriate backup workers) in a form that can replicate the idea in the minds of many people, those who read the book, and even those, like us, who hear about the book, and therefore the idea. Whether this idea is worth believing or not is another subject which theosophy can illuminate. If one really wants to know, one owes it to oneself to investigate all available data. First hand experience is best, but if our investigator wasn't at the site of the event, and didn't see it on the news (if he did see it, then of course he has to decide whether to believe what he sees on TV) then he has only the information he can gather, and his own intelligence to help him figure out what really happened. But theosophy teaches that it is only useful to "believe" that which one has proven to his own personal satisfaction. So the theosophist may read the book you mention, as possibly providing some insight into what may have happened, but he will not "believe" what he reads until he can be sure that all the facts add up. Sometimes, there is a situation in which it is impossible to get enough information in order to make an intelligent determination, to discover what is really true. In this case, the theosophist withholds judgement, keeping the idea, whatever it may be, in mind, until at some future time the problem is solved, more "evidence" becomes available, and he can satisfy himself that he understands. Adelasie On 1 Apr 2002 at 18:53, bri_mue wrote: > Just to show how real thoughts are so that they even make people reach > in their pockets to buy this book, look at this. Something that you > might think has noting to do with Theosophy, but it has, showing how > people can belief a lot of things even now, not only during the time > of Blavatsky: > > The Frightening Fraud, by Thierry Meyssan, sold out its original run > of 20,000 copies within two hours of going on sale. "We've sold 2,500 > copies in 10 days, when a blockbuster novel sells maybe 1,500 in a > month," a spokesman at Fnac Les Halles, one of France's biggest > bookshops, said. "It's a phenomenon." > > Mr Meyssan's conspiracy theory argues that American Airlines flight > 77, which killed 189 people when it smashed into the headquarters of > the US defence department, did not exist, and that the whole disaster > was a dastardly plot dreamed up and implemented by the US government. > > "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists and > everyone is happy" said Le Nouvel Observateur. > Bri. > > > ---In theos-talk@y..., "adelasie" wrote: > > Brigitte, > > > > That is the point, exactly: > > > > On 1 Apr 2002 at 2:00, brigitte muehlegger wrote: > > > > > > Bri.: Analytically, you can define any amount of dimensional > > > space, there could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, > > > although such > a > > > geometry might exist only in thought and not in the real world. > > > But apparently you can't read the mathematics. > > > > Thought is the real world, the function of creativity. Thoughts are > > things. All comes into manifestation from the realm of mind. The > > material world is the result of activity of the mental realms, not > > the other way around. > > > > Adelasie > > > > > 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 eldon@theosophy.com Tue Apr 02 06:32:11 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 14:32:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 9292 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 14:31:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 14:31:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pegasus.imagiware.com) (64.49.222.14) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 14:31:58 -0000 Received: from SCRIBE.theosophy.com (unknown [167.167.187.57]) by pegasus.imagiware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF35442F for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 08:31:57 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314094246.025e4b70@theosophy.net> X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:59:33 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: what is a troll? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Eldon B Tucker X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=5654132 X-Yahoo-Profile: eldon_tucker Bart forwarded to me the following examples of what a troll is, and what a troll does to destroy a mailing list. He had previously posted it on theos-l. It may be of interest for this list as well. -- Eldon >Stupid Troll Tricks > >--> 1. The Blitzkreig Trick: attempting to take over a newsgroup >through sheer volume of posting. Note the troll is in many cases simply >posting articles copied from news sources, or spending his/her time >attacking others instead of discussing issues pertaining to the >newsgroup. > >--> 1a. The Ad Hominem Blitzkreig Trick: posting a series of messages >with his/her target's name in the subject line, together with >name-calling or accusations questioning their credibility or mental >stability. > >--> 2. The Mirror Trick. Notice how the troll will fire back an >accusation that his opponent has accused him/her of. > >--> 2a. The Copycat Trick. This is when the troll mimics any >accusation, insult, method of argument, etc. his/her opponent uses >against him. > >--> 3. The Hypocrisy Trick. The troll is deliberately hypocritical in >order to draw out a continued response from his/her target. > >--> 4. The Substantiation Trick. This is where the troll will demand >that the poster "provide evidence for their claims" (often unspecified) >even if the poster is merely expressing an opinion; formulating a >hypothesis; if the "evidence" is difficult to produce over Usenet, >etc. The troll will usually do this to disrupt discussion as opposed to >contributing any further discussion or information that could be useful. > >--> 5. The Semantics Trick. Taking advantage of the informal nature of >Usenet, the troll will attempt to find minor errors or differences in >semantics in order to denigrate his/her opponent. > >--> 6. The Formal Debate Trick. Taking advantage of the informal nature >of Usenet, the troll will attempt to discredit or denigrate his opponent >by referring to "The Logical Fallacies" or rules of formal debate. > >--> 6a. Note, however, that the troll will abandon these rules at the >drop of a hat whenever it suits him/her. > >--> 7. Guilt By Association Trick. "You are not arguing with all these >others; therefore, you are in league with them." > >--> 8. The Character Assassination Trick. This is where the troll will >purposely try to denigrate his/her opponent through campaigns of lies, >half-truths, magnification and even outright libel. > >--> 8a. The Libelous Propaganda Trick. This is where the troll >repeatedly lies about his/her target. > >--> 9. The Achilles Heel Trick. This is where the troll will target >aspects of his opponent's ego, personal information, level of knowledge, >opinions or beliefs, etc. > >--> 9a. The Achilles Heel Libel Trick. This is where the troll tries >to paint his/her target as being the complete opposite of what they >stand for. > >--> 10. The Schoolyard Bully Trick. Here is where the troll >demonstrates to what unsavory levels he/she will sink to by using >personal information to attack the opponent. > >--> 10a. The Psychological Vampire Trick. This is where the troll tries >to psychoanalyze his/her target, play on their emotions, etc. > >--> 10b. The Catty Schoolgirl Trick. This is where the troll sounds >like a taunting schoolgirl, baiting with loaded insults. > >--> 11. The Magnification/Slippery Slope Trick. This is where the troll >zeroes in on something he/she knows about the opponent and blows it all >out of proportion. > >--> 12. The Pretend I Didn't See That Trick. This is when the troll >purposely ignores information that would refute his/her argument. > >--> 12a. The Endless Loop Trick. "Post your evidence." [Evidence is >posted]. "This is not evidence." [Evidence is Posted]. "You have >failed to provide evidence for your claims. You have failed the burden >of proof." [...ad nauseum...] > >--> 12b. The Snipperoo Trick. The troll snips relevant or damning >information in his response posts. > >--> 12c. The Misattribution Trick. The troll attributes the >words/opinions/claims of an author to the poster who has merely provided >a link to the article in question. > >--> 13. The Smooth Talker Trick. This is where the troll starts asking >his/her opponent personal questions in order to access some background >information on them. Often he/she will initially appear to be polite >and charming. > >--> 14. The Switcheroo Trick. The troll switches the meaning of the >opponent's intentions/statements/opinions/beliefs to make it seem like >they meant something else. > >--> 15. The Logic vs. Emotions Trick. This is where the troll will use >loaded language in order to draw an emotional response from his/her >opponent. > >--> 16. The Troll Is The Authority Trick. The Troll comes to a group >devoted to the discussion ABOUT a topic and decides that discussion is >only going to be about one side of that topic. > >--> 17. The Scapegoat Trick. This is where the troll blames his current >target for possibly unrelated occurrences (such as being forged, etc.) From eldon@theosophy.com Tue Apr 02 07:10:02 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 15:10:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 10239 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 15:10:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 15:10:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pegasus.imagiware.com) (64.49.222.14) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 15:10:00 -0000 Received: from SCRIBE.theosophy.com (unknown [167.167.187.57]) by pegasus.imagiware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E72E4493 for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 09:10:00 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020402070626.00a5a120@theosophy.com> X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 07:09:46 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: some mailing list rules Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Eldon B Tucker X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=5654132 X-Yahoo-Profile: eldon_tucker The following is loosely taken from the list rules for the el-m mailing list. I've rewritten them and adopted them for the theos-talk mailing list. -- Eldon Tucker (writing as listowner) ---- 1. There are all things we feel strongly about. If the discussions get heated, try to avoid flaming. (That is personal, abusive attacks indented to incite, degrade, or make fun of another or their ideas with no positive outcome.) Flaming of the listowner(s) either on or off list, for their actions on the list, is not permitted. 2. Spamming is not allowed. That includes unsolicited email of a commercial or advertising nature. A brief monthly announcement of other lists or web sites, though, is allowed. It also includes length signature lines on emails that are posted to the list. 3. Decisions by the listowner(s) are final and abiding. If a listowner tells you to drop a topic, please do so. ---- From eldon@theosophy.com Tue Apr 02 07:37:33 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 15:37:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 5171 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 15:37:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 15:37:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pegasus.imagiware.com) (64.49.222.14) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 15:37:32 -0000 Received: from SCRIBE.theosophy.com (unknown [167.167.187.57]) by pegasus.imagiware.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A834493; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 09:37:31 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020402063215.00a35860@theosophy.com> X-Sender: eldon@theosophy.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2002 07:37:02 -0800 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: time to move on Cc: bri_mue@yahoo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: Eldon B Tucker X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=5654132 X-Yahoo-Profile: eldon_tucker Since Brigitte joined the list, there have been a series of complaints received about her behavior. Some long-term participants have specifically unsubscribed because of her. I have noticed several times when people have written her on the list and asked her to behave herself, only to see her lash out at them in return. This particular list was created to provide a safe place to study the theosophical philosophy. No particular belief is imposed on participants. Everyone is allowed an equal voice, with no select individual or individuals empowered to make final statements on behalf of Theosophy. The unmoderated nature of the list is important. It allows for a wide range of creative ideas. There may be rare cases where it is abused. After careful consideration, I must conclude that it's in the best interest of the list that I unsubscribe Brigitte. -- Eldon Tucker (writing as listowner) From samblo@cs.com Tue Apr 02 08:57:19 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Samblo@cs.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 16:57:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 7211 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 16:57:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 16:57:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m08.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.163) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 16:57:19 -0000 Received: from Samblo@cs.com by imo-m08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id 6.c5.20b2fc7f (4470) for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:57:10 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:57:10 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Free energy devices, an old dream. To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: CompuServe 2000 32-bit sub 107 From: samblo@cs.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=27151446 Brigitte, Thank you for your reply. Well, Tom Bearden holds a Ph.D. as do 2 other named individuals of the Patent. To my recall he has been engaged in this type of research effort for at least 27 years, if nothing else exhibiting that famous word H.P.B. loved "TRY." I give him credit for perseverance if nothing else. Yes, it is quite repletly stated in his joint Patent a permanent magnet is an element of the device, but as with multitudes of other technological devices quite useful to the current civilization that is not novel or new or violation of excepted convention or usage. It is only 1 element of the device, he has not claimed to have invented magnets. He posted which Reviews the Patent will be published in on his home page as you may have overlooked. In the USA different from some countries Patent Application must be accompanied by a working "Demonstration Model" that upon test by the Patent Office must exhibit all Patent Claimed Novelty features successfully. The granting of Patent in the USA has a higher standard than many other countries, often the Model that demonstrates the Patent Claims is provided with the initial Disclosure Prior to Patent Application. Due to a glitch in my Adobe acrobat Reader I am foreclosed from viewing the many PDF contents on the Bearden Home Page nonetheless I have read enough to see the claims in regard to the technical Materials technology incorporated the Process he claims which even though without moving parts is Electronically sound as what occurs on the Motherboard of your PC which also has no moving parts. They in their Claim states that the device utilizes energy available in the "environment" which is transduced via the Process of which the Permanent is 1 element of many. No, I do not see any reference to "antennae" explicit in their Formal Description of the Patent. Perhaps the idea connected to the word is all that applies here as looking at the device one sees no antennae. One departure of their Device is the temporary input power which is said to be brief and used for initialization of process operation only, in effect a "Priming Pump" which is shut off once baseline cycle operation is attained as I read it. I once had a Registered U.S. Patent Attorney who was the Head of TRW world Marketing after Heading for 16 years their Patent Division, Patents are very expensive and have to meet the validation of claims by scientific test here, NASA included. John From leonmaurer@aol.com Tue Apr 02 12:48:05 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 20:48:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 57046 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 20:48:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 20:48:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d05.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.37) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 20:48:04 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.1ad.153585 (3975) for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:48:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <1ad.153585.29db7300@aol.com> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 15:48:00 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Dalas and Solarworld P.2 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 Mac sub 39 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 Again, you take everything I say out of context, and quote one thing and answer or ask questions referring to something entirely different. The link referred to makes no bones about being entirely fictional and has no relationship to the theoretical scientific analysis of fundamental forces underlying the ABC theory. I haven't the faintest idea what mathematics you are talking about. If its the mathematics of quantum gravity or string theory that confirms the logical multidimensionality of the ABC or theosophical metaphysical view, it's apparently you who doesn't understand any of it. Therefore, any assertions you make regarding the invalidity of the zero-point originated multidimensionality of the universe in the form of "coenergetic, coadunate but not consubstantial" fields, are worthless -- unless you can come up with an alternate theoretical view that explains the nature of consciousness, mind and matter, and their origins and interrelationships, that current science along with their contrived materialistic mathematics -- related to the (theoretical and as yet unproved) "four dimensional space time continuum" -- cannot explain. LHM In a message dated 04/01/02 1:50:21 AM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes: >Analytically, you can define any amount of dimensional space, there >could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, although such a >geometry might exist only in thought and not in the real world. >But apparently you can't read the mathematics. > >You mention a device to produce free-energy, but does it exist , or >is that also just hypothetically (fiction/fantasy )? > >http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/solwldcrystpos >ter.html#anchor1097781 > > Bri. > >> >> In a message dated 03/23/02 3:51:32 PM, bri_mue@y... writes: ' >> [Quoting Jerry Schueler, followed by the usual hodgepodge of non >> sequitur historical and illogically prejudiced "proofs" (snipped) that the >> theosophical chakra system of 7 fold coadunate but not consubstantial >> fields is a false, unscientific view.] >> >> >Jerry: I find this something like using a shoe horn to get a small >> >shoe onto a large foot. I take this "antiquity" business with a grain >> >of salt. There is absolutely NO reason that anyone can show as to why >> >7 is necessary or better than 6 or 5. The Enochian system works well >> >with 6. Tibetan Buddhism works well with 5. Seven is arbitrary. >> >You will seldom find any 7-sheath models in Hinduism or Buddhism or >> >Vedanta. Row was a Theosophist and was reaching. Most schemes have >> >five or six sheaths. And are these sheaths principles or bodies? It >> >is still confusing. Judge and Besant both confounded bodies and >> >principle has a corresponding body or vehicle (upadhi). HPB says >> >that each plane is associated with a principle. And so it goes, with >> >Theosophists today still arguing and debating on what it all means. >> >This sevenfold division is very arbitrary and is NOT the way things >> >are experienced. It is purely a Theosophical methodology and if we >> >can all accept that, we will be better off. There is nothing wrong >> >with having our own divisions of 7, and such a division works well >> >for me, but we need to recognize and accept that it is arbitrary and >> >NOT some kind of law of nature. >> >> The above statements indicate that your ideas are perhaps based on >> literally interpreted dogmas that fit with your own preconceptions and >> with your, possibly, mistaken interpretations of the Buddha's as well as >>since HPB's teachings -- which are quite paradoxical within themselves -- >> both teachers were faced with two opposite states of existence along with >> all the possible intermediate states, further confounded by their language >> barriers or lossesin translation. Therefore, we must be very careful to look >> at their contrary statements about divisions of space with very careful >> consideration of the contextual nature as well as the stage of involution and/or >> evolution they are referring to -- coupled with a thorough understanding of and >> ability to apply fundamental principles -- before making any judgments that we >> are tempted to cut in stone. >> >> Maybe we should also stop looking at contradictory historical ideas and >> other people's concepts to gain knowledge of metaphysical truths, and >> start thinking for ourselves based on fundamental principles... That is, to >> scientifically derive in our own minds where all these different divisions >> come from, and how they fit in with the overall truth; Which is that, the >> differentiation's of primary space and its fundamental "spinergy" is >> ultimately infinitely divisible... With "strange attractors" along the way >> that bring, at different stages, differing degrees of order out of the >> initial chaos. Thus the basic divisions or "orders," "phases," "planes," >> "fields," etc., could be any number from two to a googolplex. Although, >> lower numbers from two to twenty-one tend to repeat themselves >> the periodically along the way. >> >> Therefore, there's no reason for the divisions of "coadunate but not >> consubstantial fields" of nature not to be based on fundamental laws of >> energy involution and evolution, starting from their zero (laya) points of >> origin. >> >> Since this starting point is composed solely of abstract motion or >> circular spin, its emanations must obey the fixed laws of cycles and >> periodicity which govern all the harmonics of vibrational energy >> fields -- regardless of their spectrums, >> phases or orders of frequency -- from astral light to physical sound >> (and even lower to gravitational waves). Therefore, all the field >> involution's must follow the same laws of musical harmony -- which can >> be divided into either octaval, decimal or duodecimal scales -- as HPB >> repeatedly pointed out. As for these divisions, they can also be broken >> down into two, three, four, five, six, seven, ten, twelve, etc., >> subdivisions or harmonics. >> >> Since complete harmonies on the physical plane can be generated, >>> starting with the simplest seven fold system, this is the basis of choosing >> the 7 chakras which correspond with the octaval musical harmonies, and >>color scales or spectrums we directly experience. But, in some cultures >>>where their musical scales are based on the decimal or duodecimal system, >> it is common to choose such a "chakra" (center) or "sheath" (field) system >> (to describe the human "nature") -- that can be divided into either 3, 4, 5, >> or 6 fields -- depending on the particular nature (spiritual, psychological, >>material, etc.) of the involved or evolved field effects that is being discussed. >> >> Thus, some "magical" systems are based on the 5 divisions and others >> on the 6 divisions. (For reasons there is no need to go into here.) But, >> fundamentally, all these systems are governed by the same scientific laws >> related to the coadunate but not consubstantial coenergetic and cyclic field >> nature of the universe (along with the analogous inner natures of all the >> beings involved and evolved within it). These laws of harmony as well as of >> analogy and correspondence are described in mystic parlance as, >> "The music of the spheres" and "As above, so below." >> >> Another good study practice, is to visualize the varying linear geometry's of >> the initial involution of the nonlinear circular forces -- using both the >> linear left and nonlinear right brain thought processes, simultaneously. For >> example, from a geometric point of view, at the zero-point, in order to >> linearly describe the primal at(o)mic 3 dimensional spherical state after >> initial emanation of the zero (laya) point's "spinergy," there would be, >> fundamentally, only three directional lines passing through that center point >> at right angles -- each line pointing in opposite directions. >> >> Thus the initial 3-dimensional spherical field can be represented in linear >> geometry by the 6 directions, up-down, left-right, front-back -- which, by >> connecting their axial end points, forms an inscribed octahedron or double >> pyramid diamond figure that has 3 axes, 6 outer points and 1 center >> point, as well as 8 triangular sides and 12 edges. This is the simplest >> inscribed linear geometry (that can also be transformed into a cube, which >> has 1 center point, 8 outer points, 6 sides and 12 edges) -- representing, >> analogously, the nonlinear spherical geometry of the 3 cycle primary energy >> radiation and its divisions into triune, coadunate but not consubstantial fields >> that forms the primal "Monad." (See the diagrams at: >> >http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.ht >ml/ ) >> >> Thus -- since the octahedron is the simplest analogous form, with >its 7 >> zero-points of origin and conjunction of subsequent evolutionary >fields (all >> based on the initial 3 cycle triune "monad" consisting of 1 outer >field and 2 >> inscribed inner fields) -- it is most natural to use the initial >seven >> division system as the fundamental nature of the macrocosm, or >Cosmos, that >> is directly reflected in the microcosm, or Mankind (that also >relates >> directly to our three dimensional physical universe). This >corresponds with >> the primal involution formula in the Book of Dzyan, "The 3, the 1, >the 4, the >> 1, the 5, the twice 7, the sum total." (Thus, the 7 above, and the >7 below >> -- as the first numerological description of the analogous >relationship >> between the "chakra-fields" of the macrocosm and those of the >microcosm.) >> This is the fundamental and lawful mathematical (geometrical and >topological) >> basis of all theosophical metaphysics. And, is the root of all >other systems, >> each of which is based on one of the seven points of view of the >initial >> triune spin field. Unfortunately, the current basis of scientific >thought, >> while it can look into and describe the physical universe from its >six outer >> or objective points of view, does not consider the equally valid >inner >> central or subjective point of view -- and, thus, cannot experience >or >> determine the nature of the multidimensional inner, coadunate but >not >> consubstantial fields that are enclosed and contained by the >relatively >> eternal at(o)mic field. >> >> This octaval scheme, of course, has nothing to do with magic -- >since it is >> used only to describe the fundamental or primary 7 fold nature of >> Cosmogenesis and its reflection in corresponding fields of human >> consciousness, along with the linking of the dual spiritual nature, >through >> the dual psychic nature, with the dual physical nature through >their 5 >> intermediate connecting zero-points tying these dual fields >together. In >> addition, there are the 2 outer points linking the higher and lower >> (frequency) order fields (Atma and physical) with the surrounding >universal >> fields (Mahatma and Fohat). Thus, totaling 7 chakra points in all - >- which, >> correlated with the initial at(o)mic triad, gives us the total of >ten as >> expressed in the so called "Trees of life," (symbolized either >circularly or >> linearly, depending on whether we look at the paths either as 8 >nonlinear c >> oadunate spherical fields and 3 zero points as 8 linear geometrical >divisions >> of the octahedron and three primary axes). >> >> That, incidentally, is the basis of the three plus seven fold, four >level >> spherical chakra system that is analogous with the similarly >numbered linear >> system -- since the zero-points and their surrounding coenergetic >fields are, >> by necessity, with respect to the perpendicular force of gravity >and the >> symmetry of the human body, lined up along the vertical axis. Ref: >the SD >> linear drawings of the Rounds and Races, and the Sephirothal tree, >as well as >> the symbolic initial involution field drawing at the above >mentioned web >> site. These seven points (below the triple "crown") are >the "chakras" spoken >> of in theosophical teachings and some Tibetan Buddhist teachings, >and >> represent the seven fold nature of both the macrocosm and the >microcosm. >> >> However, magical practices (which, incidentally, theosophy does not >consider >> useful to teach outside the inner circles of avowed "chelas") use >other d >> ivisions based, symbolically, on the hexagon and pentagon 2-D >geometry's... >> (That are all, incidentally -- as parts of 3-D icosahedron and >dodecahedron >> geometry's -- contained within or projected from the primary 3-D >octahedron >> and cubic geometry's.) >> >> Interestingly, some 25 years ago, I built a 3-dimensional toothpick >model of >> that projection in a mobile sculpture that contained a logical >progression of >> all five regular polygons, one nested inside the other. It's also >> interesting that, if you assemble 6 octahedrons together, edge to >edge, they >> form a larger octahedron with 8 tetrahedron voids centered on its >triangular >> surfaces -- yet the larger octahedron still has 6 outer apex points >and 1 >> center point (=7). This multiplication of octahedrons inscribed in >spheres >> can be extended indefinitely until one as large as the physical >universe is >> reached -- that still has 7 primary "chakra" points defining its >analogous >> spherical shape. Thus the universe can have a near infinite >multiplicity of >> analogous 7 fold entities between the zero-point and its maximum >spherical >> extension in metric space. >> >> Should one be capable of conjointly using the dual mental powers, >and has >> found the "Master within," its a relatively simple matter to >visualize the >> connections between the primary seven fold divisions and all the >other >> decimal and duodecimal divisions chosen by the different schools of >mystical >> and magical teachings. >> >> Consequently, it might be added, the historical view of trying to >understand >> mystical teachings by literally interpreting the words, names or >descriptions >> used to explain the metaphysical powers, fields, planes, divisions, >field >> effects, etc., by various teachers or schools, is fraught with >danger... In >> that it confuses the mind, and causes one to either accept the most >> comfortable interpretation that fits in with ones own prejudices, >> preconceptions, and prior conditionings -- or totally deny the >possibility >> that such transcendental field divisions exist at all. >> >> As HPB teaches, the entire system of metaphysical thought can be >considered >> and understood from a logical, scientific basis -- whose >prerequisite is an >> entirely open, unconditioned, and equally balanced intuitive and >rational >> mind, as well as a thorough understanding and correlation of the >three >> fundamental principles or propositions -- which should come long >before a >> comparative study of the different religious and mystery schools' >limited >> concepts of metaphysical truths (that are beyond the capabilities >of ordinary >> linear, or left brain linguistic thinking to interpret or >understand >> esoterically). It's a fact that the Universe involves and evolves >from the >> zero-point through nonlinear processes... And, therefore, with >linear >> thinking, it is impossible to see the reality of its inner nature -- > other >> than the shadows it projects on the wall of (it's third level down) >> phenomenal matter and metric space. >> >> LHM > From Nisk98114@aol.com Tue Apr 02 13:38:41 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Nisk98114@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 21:38:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 87871 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 21:38:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 21:38:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r06.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.102) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 21:38:33 -0000 Received: from Nisk98114@aol.com by imo-r06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.135.c0ef289 (18709) for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:38:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <135.c0ef289.29db7ec3@aol.com> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:38:11 EST Subject: Eldon and etiquette.... 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 138 From: Nisk98114@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=84166184 It IS time to move on. From leonmaurer@aol.com Tue Apr 02 13:42:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 21:42:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 71221 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 21:42:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 21:42:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d08.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.40) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 21:42:14 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-d08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.15d.ba6f3de (3975) for ; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:42:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <15d.ba6f3de.29db7fa8@aol.com> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:42:00 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Superstrings Tantra and Blavatsky. To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Mac sub 39 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 Thank you for your prejudicial and negatively interpretive review of=20 Goswami's book -- which confirms my claims that your main purposes here are= =20 to discredit (using every possible unfounded and opinionated means) any and= =20 all scientific references that might verify theosophical metaphysics (or my= =20 confirmatory ABC theory) concerning the multidimensional "coenergetic but n= ot=20 consubstantial" field nature of universal reality.=20=20 The only "hatred" I referred to was your apparent hatred of theosophical=20 metaphysics (as presented by HPB) being considered as a valid theory of=20 universal origin. History is perfectly acceptable in its place, but when=20 used as a "proof" to invalidate a modern scientific theory that may or may= =20 not be consistent with theosophical metaphysics -- it has no place... And,= =20 use of it as such by you, constitutes another evidence of your prejudicial= =20 tricks to discredit HPB in particular and theosophy in general -- by drowni= ng=20 us in non sequitur historical information of no particular relevance to the= =20 theosophical topics under discussion.=20 LHM=20 In a message dated 04/01/02 5:41:21 AM, bri_mue@yahoo.com writes: >Leon: "Goswami, Amit. The Self-Aware Universe: how consciousness=20 >creates the material world. Tarcher/Putnam, New York. 1993 -- to find=20 >out the "hard time" modern physics is having answering the "hard=20 >problems" of consciousness." > >In fact I did read Goswami, but what he writes has not much to do >with HPB as such.=20 > >In fact what you mention, "so above so below", that is from the Tabula >Smaragdina written in the 9th century and translated in Latin during the >Renaissance in Italy. But if you contantly interpret these historical > as "hatred" it is no surprise that under these circumstances you can=20 >also not get the real facts of the mathematics down, as you will=20 >interpret these also as "hatred." That you don't want to study history >and see where the ideas you claim really came from is therefore your=20 >2e problem.=20 > > >Goswami has published several books presenting an idealist=20 > >interpretation of quantum mechanics, the best known being "The > >Self Aware Universe" . In 1996, Goswami and Henry Swift began > >publishing an on line bulletin called Science Within Consciousness,=20 > >carrying articles on idealist quantum metaphysics. In his publications, > > >Goswami presents two principal claims. > > > >Firstly, quantum physics is best explained within a framework that=20 > >hovers between idealism and neutral monism. More precisely, the=20 > >underlying "stuff" of the universe that, according to Goswami, is=20 > >revealed by quantum physics should be understood as consciousness. In=20 > >Goswami's terminology, however, consciousness is not the same as=20 > >mind, but an unknowable something that transcends both mind and=20 > >matter. Perhaps, in Berkeleyan fashion, one could interpret Goswami > >as saying that it is a transcendent consciousness that causes the > >properties of the macroscopic world to emerge. > > > >Secondly, he claims that quantum mechanics provides support for > >claims of a variety of paranormal phenomena. Psychic phenomena, such=20 > >as distant viewing and out of body experiences, are examples of what=20 > >he calls the non local operation of consciousness, which he attempts to > > >support by means of an unorthodox interpretation of the EPR paradox. > >It has been formally demonstrated that the seemingly coordinated=20 > >behavior of two particles at a distance implied in the EPR paradox=20 > >cannot be used to transmit information as this would be an attempt > >to explain an imperfectly instantiated paranormal phenomenon by=20 > >means of ad hoc hypotheis. Goswami's solution to this problem is to=20 > >invoke a principle of his own, which he calls downward causation by=20 > >consciousness. His idea is that consciousness collapses quantum waves=20 > >of possibility into actual events, and that conscious intention can=20 > >correlate two quantum objects. This would purportedly explain how, > >for instance, telepathy could be possible. > > > > Goswami's quantum metaphysics thus goes beyond the construction of=20 > >an idealist philosophy. In his publications and on line bulletins, Goswami >=3D > > > > >has invoked his interpretation of physics to endorse a variety of New Age > > >claims ranging from psychokinesis and remote viewing to channeling=20 > >and healing. We shall return to such uses of quantum metaphysics in the > > >following section. Goswami's own professed purpose is to show that=20 > >physics not only has suggestive parallels with Indian monistic idealism > > >(as Capra did),but to demonstrate that a philosophy of monistic idealism > > >is the only reasonable ontological framework within which it is possible > > >to make sense of the world of quantum mechanics. The rhetorical=20 > >strategies employed to do so are highly reminiscent of those found=20 > >in "The Tao of Physics". The idealism that Goswami refers to is a kind >of > >"philosophia perennis" a popular idea during the Renaisance. As I=20 > >mentioned before this universalizing view of religion is constructed=20 > >by a liberal use of synonymization and pattern recognition. Thus, the=20 > >twin elements of the Indian concept of nama rupa, generally > >translated as "name and form", are assimilated to Western philosophical > > >and psychological terminology by being interpreted as "transcendent=20 > >archetypes" and "immanent form", respectively. See also my remarks=20 > >about John Dee and others of that period, Renaisance. > > > >The Hindu term brahman is explained as a synonym of the Christian > >Holy Spirit, and so on. The range of idealist philosophies quoted in > >support of Goswami's own thesis is far vaster than Capra's. In The Self > > >Aware Universe, there are references to Vedanta, Daoism, Mahayana=20 > >Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, Zen, Platonism, Yoga, and a host of other=20 > >traditions. Goswami's physics is equally unorthodox. The traditional=20 > >Copenhagen interpretation is explained in passing and the more upto=20 > >date theories of decoherence do not enter the discussion, whereas=20 > >theories that might support Goswami's own views are referred to=20 > >throughout his text .=20 > > > >It can be noted that recent statements of quantum=20 > >metaphysics share their perspective with other New Age popularizations > > >of the topic: the developments of the first forty years are=20 > >overemphasized at the expense of the advances of the last few decades. > > > >Goswami constructs the same straw man as Talbot in "Mysticism and=20 > >the New Physics"pp. 45 f., by claiming that the view of > >consciousness as an epiphenomenon of material (neurological)=20 > >processes reduces consciousness to the status of an illusion; "Self Aware > >Universe" p. 6 > >The argument may have had some validity during the time Of=20 > >behaviorism, but is out of place in works written in the early > >1990's. > > > >Adopting such an idealist interpretation would, according to Goswami,=20 > >have much wider implications than just supplanting one view of the=20 > >world with another.=20 > > > >By embracing philo sophical materialism, the worldview underpinning=20 > >classical physics is also said to foster materialism in the everyday > >sense of the word, i.e. the wish to hoard possessions.Consequently,=20 > >quantum metaphysics is not only a way of understanding physical reality, > > >but ultimately a path to reconcile science and religion, make us accept > >the spiritual experiences, heal our alienation and, ultimately, effect >a > >major social transformation: > > > >"If ordinary people really knew that consciousness and not matter > >is the link that connects us with each other and the world, then their > > >view about war and peace, environmental pollution, social justice, > >religious values, and all other endeavors would change=20 > >radically."(Goswami "Self =E2=80=93Aware Universe" p. 8. This > >utopian agenda is central to Goswami's project.) > > > >In order to further his idealistic interpretation, Goswami, like > >others in the the quantum metaphysical genre that I mentioned in an=20 > >earlier posting to you (Leon), combines a view of physics shared > >with very few scientists with a description of Indian > >philosophy that is hardly defensible from a historical point of view. > >Rather then being a presentation of modern physics in any > >conventional sense, "The Se!f Aware Universe" appears to center on the > >need for spiritual transformation and the possibility of seeing the birth >o=3D > > >f=20 > >a new age. Significantly, paratextual markers in Goswami's The Self=20 > >Aware Universe contribute to labeling his work as neither a work of > >popularized physics nor a book on idealist philosophy, but specifically >as =3D > > > > >an example of New Age literature. The endorsements and comments on=20 > >the back flap are thus not principally those of fellow physicists, but of= =20 > >New Age spokespersons healer Larry Dossey, an anonymous reviewer=20 > >from the Yoga journal. The preface is an endorsement by an even more=20 > >controversial quantum metaphysicist, Fred Alan Wolf, who became=20 > >known for his Capra like assertion that there are significant parallels > > >between modern physics and traditional shamanism.=20=20 > > = =20 > =3D > > > Bri. From oraganon@bellsouth.net Tue Apr 02 13:42:33 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: oraganon@bellsouth.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 2 Apr 2002 21:42:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 43844 invoked from network); 2 Apr 2002 21:42:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Apr 2002 21:42:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imf22bis.bellsouth.net) (205.152.58.82) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Apr 2002 21:42:32 -0000 Received: from [67.34.28.32] by imf22bis.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.04.05 201-253-122-122-105-20011231) with ESMTP id <20020402214342.POWB19878.imf22bis.bellsouth.net@[67.34.28.32]>; Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:43:42 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: oraganon@mail.bellsouth.net Message-Id: Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 16:43:27 -0500 To: oraganon@yahoogroups.com, Visionary_Shamanism@yahoogroups.com, IlluminAlch@yahoogroups.com, dreamnet@yahoogroups.com, free_mind_club@yahoogroups.com, neoism@yahoogroups.com, lcdci@egroups.com, AgelessWisdomDiscussion@yahoogroups.com, alternatif-net@yahoogroups.com, chaos-worldwide@yahoogroups.com, chaoskaos@yahoogroups.com, GreenWitches@yahoogroups.com, Magickally_Alive_Again@yahoogroups.com, Spiritgrowth@yahoogroups.com, the-poetry-thread@yahoogroups.com, RunicRing@yahoogroups.com, chaos-worldwide@yahoogroups.com, SeriousChaos@yahoogroups.com, TheHornedGod@yahoogroups.com, studycircle@yahoogroups.com, UniversalSeekers@yahoogroups.com, EmeraldTablet@yahoogroups.com, theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, soul-list@yahoogroups.com Subject: Poly Directive From: Ademm Indra Ka X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=96819079 X-Yahoo-Profile: cjrifkind Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Still born reactions of days filled with activities as it were=20 Electrical threads move the mountain of eclectic positioning Blue=20 moons in and out of arranged time Each date time in connection with=20 poetic reasoning No time like the present No really Days in a timed=20 pre-production Erratic words calling for the moment It will give you=20 always what you want Never what you ask for Connect all with like=20 patterns Passion drives the monarch mansion into a pause Push the=20 doors open Live in your mountains hole Drive in the stake of the=20 divine purpose Focus in on what you see I will be there staring back=20 at you In and out on top of the highest mountain 2 deeds of different=20 worlds become one with eternity One looks into the well buried deep=20 within the fountain source Give up control to grasp these concepts=20 Beautiful faces with roots connecting them to the divide We have met=20 with the gods of the entwined directive Speak of creation and of the=20 masses All are filled with such Beauty its in every one of us They=20 hold there place here and beyond One must make the decision To be Or=20 not to Be and decide not ones fate many fates One lives through your=20 eyes One will be what you conceive one to be. Piece --=20 :.:":=8A::,.,,;"'.:.=20 ;,.'::.":;,.,'.,:;',,::..':.;,,";"',,:;,,=8A.:.:":=8A::,.,,;"'.:.=20 ;,.'::.":;,.,'.,:;',,::..':.;,,";"',,:;,,=8A.:.:":=8A::,.,,;"'.:. ;, IDAM VRITRAHAN KUMARA AMAKADMON ORAGANON oraganon@bellsouth.net http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oraganon/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevestubbs@yahoo.com Tue Apr 02 17:32:13 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: stevestubbs@yahoo.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 3 Apr 2002 01:32:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 65569 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2002 01:32:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Apr 2002 01:32:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web21401.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.232.71) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2002 01:32:13 -0000 Message-ID: <20020403013213.24453.qmail@web21401.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [209.246.134.16] by web21401.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 02 Apr 2002 17:32:13 PST Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:32:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Dalas and Solarworld P.2 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com In-Reply-To: <1ad.153585.29db7300@aol.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Steve Stubbs X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=7712190 X-Yahoo-Profile: stevestubbs Hi, Leon: I appreciate your link on superstring theory. Unfortunately, at the moment there is no way I can allocate sufficient time to read Hawkings' books. So may I make a suggestion. Sometime instead of merely referring to the superstring theory, could you outline at a high level how this explains consciousness and avoid technical terms one would have to study Hawkings to understand. I don't dispute the possibility that an 11 dimensional model could map to objective reality, but I am unclear how this could explain consciousness, since it seems to describe the contents of consciousness instead, or rather the noumenon of the contents of consciousness, since eight of those eleven dimensions are not phenomenal. At least I do not perceive them. Also, I am a bit confused why, if Hawkings posits an 11 dimensional space he is hostile to the idea of four dimentions, which would seem to be included in that model. SS --- leonmaurer@aol.com wrote: > > Again, you take everything I say out of context, and > quote one thing and > answer or ask questions referring to something > entirely different. The link > referred to makes no bones about being entirely > fictional and has no > relationship to the theoretical scientific analysis > of fundamental forces > underlying the ABC theory. > > I haven't the faintest idea what mathematics you are > talking about. If its > the mathematics of quantum gravity or string theory > that confirms the logical > multidimensionality of the ABC or theosophical > metaphysical view, it's > apparently you who doesn't understand any of it. > > Therefore, any assertions you make regarding the > invalidity of the zero-point > originated multidimensionality of the universe in > the form of "coenergetic, > coadunate but not consubstantial" fields, are > worthless -- unless you can > come up with an alternate theoretical view that > explains the nature of > consciousness, mind and matter, and their origins > and interrelationships, > that current science along with their contrived > materialistic mathematics -- > related to the (theoretical and as yet unproved) > "four dimensional space > time continuum" -- cannot explain. > > LHM > > In a message dated 04/01/02 1:50:21 AM, > bri_mue@yahoo.com writes: > > >Analytically, you can define any amount of > dimensional space, there > >could be a hundred dimensions, in other words, > although such a > >geometry might exist only in thought and not in the > real world. > >But apparently you can't read the mathematics. > > > >You mention a device to produce free-energy, but > does it exist , or > >is that also just hypothetically (fiction/fantasy > )? > > > >http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/solwldcrystpos > >ter.html#anchor1097781 > > > > > > Bri. > > > >> > >> In a message dated 03/23/02 3:51:32 PM, > bri_mue@y... writes: ' > >> [Quoting Jerry Schueler, followed by the usual > hodgepodge of non > >> sequitur historical and illogically prejudiced > "proofs" (snipped) that the > >> theosophical chakra system of 7 fold coadunate > but not consubstantial > >> fields is a false, unscientific view.] > >> > >> >Jerry: I find this something like using a shoe > horn to get a small > >> >shoe onto a large foot. I take this "antiquity" > business with a grain > >> >of salt. There is absolutely NO reason that > anyone can show as to why > >> >7 is necessary or better than 6 or 5. The > Enochian system works well > >> >with 6. Tibetan Buddhism works well with 5. > Seven is arbitrary. > >> >You will seldom find any 7-sheath models in > Hinduism or Buddhism or > >> >Vedanta. Row was a Theosophist and was reaching. > Most schemes have > >> >five or six sheaths. And are these sheaths > principles or bodies? It > >> >is still confusing. Judge and Besant both > confounded bodies and > >> >principle has a corresponding body or vehicle > (upadhi). HPB says > >> >that each plane is associated with a principle. > And so it goes, with > >> >Theosophists today still arguing and debating on > what it all means. > >> >This sevenfold division is very arbitrary and is > NOT the way things > >> >are experienced. It is purely a Theosophical > methodology and if we > >> >can all accept that, we will be better off. > There is nothing wrong > >> >with having our own divisions of 7, and such a > division works well > >> >for me, but we need to recognize and accept that > it is arbitrary and > >> >NOT some kind of law of nature. > >> > >> The above statements indicate that your ideas are > perhaps based on > >> literally interpreted dogmas that fit with your > own preconceptions and > >> with your, possibly, mistaken interpretations of > the Buddha's as well as > >>since HPB's teachings -- which are quite > paradoxical within themselves -- > >> both teachers were faced with two opposite states > of existence along with > >> all the possible intermediate states, further > confounded by their language > >> barriers or lossesin translation. Therefore, we > must be very careful to > look > >> at their contrary statements about divisions of > space with very careful > >> consideration of the contextual nature as well as > the stage of involution > and/or > >> evolution they are referring to -- coupled with a > thorough understanding > of and > >> ability to apply fundamental principles -- before > making any judgments > that we > >> are tempted to cut in stone. > >> > >> Maybe we should also stop looking at > contradictory historical ideas and > >> other people's concepts to gain knowledge of > metaphysical truths, and > >> start thinking for ourselves based on fundamental > principles... That is, > to > >> scientifically derive in our own minds where all > these different divisions > >> come from, and how they fit in with the overall > truth; Which is that, the > >> differentiation's of primary space and its > fundamental "spinergy" is > >> ultimately infinitely divisible... With "strange > attractors" along the way > >> that bring, at different stages, differing > degrees of order out of the > >> initial chaos. Thus the basic divisions or > "orders," "phases," "planes," > >> "fields," etc., could be any number from two to a > googolplex. Although, > >> lower numbers from two to twenty-one tend to > repeat themselves > >> the periodically along the way. > >> > >> Therefore, there's no reason for the divisions of > "coadunate but not > >> consubstantial fields" of nature not to be based > on fundamental laws of > >> energy involution and evolution, starting from > their zero (laya) points of > >> origin. > >> > >> Since this starting point is composed solely of > abstract motion or > >> circular spin, its emanations must obey the fixed > laws of cycles and > >> periodicity which govern all the harmonics of > vibrational energy > >> fields -- regardless of their spectrums, > >> phases or orders of frequency -- from astral > light to physical sound > >> (and even lower to gravitational waves). > Therefore, all the field > >> involution's must follow the same laws of musical > harmony -- which can > >> be divided into either octaval, decimal or > duodecimal scales -- as HPB > >> repeatedly pointed out. As for these divisions, > they can also be broken > >> down into two, three, four, five, six, seven, > ten, twelve, etc., > >> subdivisions or harmonics. > >> > >> Since complete harmonies on the physical plane > can be generated, > >>> starting with the simplest seven fold system, > this is the basis of > choosing > >> the 7 chakras which correspond with the octaval > musical harmonies, and > >>color scales or spectrums we directly experience. > But, in some cultures > >>>where their musical scales are based on the > decimal or duodecimal system, > >> it is common to choose such a "chakra" (center) > or === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax http://taxes.yahoo.com/ From dalval14@earthlink.net Wed Apr 03 05:51:30 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_1); 3 Apr 2002 13:51:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 24760 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2002 13:51:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Apr 2002 13:51:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.120) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Apr 2002 13:51:29 -0000 Received: from pool0182.cvx11-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.188.182] helo=earthlink) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16slAa-0003Ew-00; Wed, 03 Apr 2002 05:51:24 -0800 To: "AA-B-Study" Subject: RE: Free energy devices, Is it only "an old dream?" Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 05:43:55 -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) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300 In-Reply-To: From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 April 2, 2002 Dear Friends: Re: Free energy -- Is it really a dream ? Are we missing something ? As I recall, in the first volume of the THEOSOPHIST that H P B issued in Bombay in 1879 there was on p. 54 an article on GARY'S MAGNETIC MOTOR. Diagrams are given. And ample description. There are two types. One is a reciprocal motion and the other is a vortical (circular) motion. I recall as a youngster (1930s and 40s) in Bombay, in my own crude home lab, trying to duplicate the experiments, and found out that the dimensions as drawn were not to scale. Actually the