From etvionbb@netvision.net.il Sat Feb 01 00:38:06 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: etvionbb@netvision.net.il X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 08:38:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 96560 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 08:38:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 08:38:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mxout1.netvision.net.il) (194.90.9.20) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 08:38:06 -0000 Received: from Etzion1 ([62.0.146.29]) by mxout1.netvision.net.il (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.08 (built Dec 6 2002)) with SMTP id <0H9M00BHYFYVT5@mxout1.netvision.net.il> for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 01 Feb 2003 10:38:05 +0200 (IST) Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 10:40:02 +0200 Subject: Re: Theos-World yoga To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Message-id: <001a01c2c9cd$83d57bc0$0100a8c0@Etzion1> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal References: <27.37eb5896.2b6c697b@aol.com> From: Etzion Becker X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=78835804 X-Yahoo-Profile: etzion7398 I think what you say is basically true. The Truth is always within us, then, why don't we express it? Why all these horrible people on the planet commit daily horrendous crimes, where is the God being within themselves? Why Truth doesn't act through them? It is due to all these impression, age billions of years, which formed, as I call it, a *lead helmet* around the head, and prevents any fusion of the individual with Truth. It is true that an individual can attain Truth on his own, however, this will be very, very long, fraught with dangers, and most painful. And to top it all, it is not possible for anyone, to cross the last threshold unaided. I.e. crossing between the Six plane of consciousness and the Seventh plane. For one, the gap between these two planes is infinite, unlike the gap between the other planes, and that's why people can reach on their own a very exalted states, due to use of yoga technics, pure unselfish service for humanity etc, but they NEVER will be able to cross the last threshold on their own. Why? Because Perfection demands that the individual will be impressions-free. In order to wipe out impressions, you must create counter-impressions, which will be perfectly the opposite - they must be exactly in the same *shape*, and the same quantity. Now see the impossibility of the whole thing: good sanskaras (enslaving impressions), must to be wiped out as well. So, suppose a very saintly man enters the path, and he has, for the sake of our argument, only *good* sanskaras. It must be counteracted by *bad* sanskaras; how he is going to do this? I can tell you quite simply, that even a Six plane Master cannot help it. Now look at your personal case, you know about the Path, you learn all that you have learnt, due to the grace of the Masters: I have no doubt that true Masters backed Blavatsky, and I didn't study all this you are studying, I didn't read Isis Unveiled, and I didn't finish yet The Secret Doctrine, and I didn't read The Mahatma letters, and Blavatsky's letters. Why do I know this? It has a *smell*. I know it for myself. I wouldn't be here unless my Master wanted it. I see how my fellow Israeli Theosophists are being benefited. To serve a true Master is no mean achievement, trust me, it is a hair standing adventure, which demands taking spiritual responsibility, and willingness to undergo hardships cheerfully. And as an adage, we are only a burden on the Masters, they are not obliged to help us, we could have been ignored, and you would never assume what you truly say in your last paragraph below. Yours truly, Etzion ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 2:06 AM Subject: Re: Theos-World yoga > But, this "surrender" should not be misinterpreted. > > To be Human beings -- who are each, essentially, God incarnate -- is not to > be sheep, or like any other "animal" without a capability of Self realization. > > To surrender to a self professed "living" or "dead" Master is a "vicarious > atonement" sidetrack that may pacify one, but does nothing more than delay > one's attainment of self mastery... Since a true Master says, "Do not follow > me, but follow the path I show you." This is the only true and independent > way to transcend ones karma, defuse the skandas, and attain true Freedom -- > requiring no kow towing, worship, or obedience to any personality, idol, > organization, or Gods... As theosophy teaches, only the TRUTH can make you > FREE. > > Therefore, there is only one "perfect Master" to surrender one's lower self > to... And, that is the Higher Self within each of us... Following all the > below rules of living that are essentially the "Heart doctrine" coupled with > the "Eye Doctrine"... Thus, combining ALL the yoga's and their goals into ONE > "self devised and self determined study and practice" -- that can suit each > individual's level of awareness and understanding when staring out, > independently, on the Path to eternal Freedom. > > LHM > From mail@katinkahesselink.net Sat Feb 01 02:59:11 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 10:59:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 37330 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 10:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 10:59:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n30.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.87) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 10:59:10 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.169] by n30.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Feb 2003 10:59:10 -0000 Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 10:59:09 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Re: Wry on Blavatsky part one Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000a01c2c966$7daf8fe0$24d0f7a5@idapingala> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 5179 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Katinka Hesselink " X-Originating-IP: 217.121.208.124 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92802723 X-Yahoo-Profile: katinka_hesselink Hi Wry, Will try once more to get to something here. Though, to be honest, there is nothing there that I am all too interested in. Also, you can't attack Blavatsky and then expect us to sit quietly by. In my opinion attack's should be properly based on fact, or quote, or refrained from altogether. > > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 6:22 AM > > Subject: Theos-World Re: Wry on Blavatsky part one > > > Hi. I would like to make an addendum to the part of my message > which is > quoted below.. When I spoke of authoritarianism being disgusting I > was speaking of what I felt when I have seen it in myself. Which means you were probably projecting. > Do you understand > that by phrasing the material above in the way that you did, you > were, to > use a psychological term, objectifying me (turning me into an > object)? Do > you understand that therre was no way to go any further after > reading this? Well, if there wasn't why are you still here? And, no, I don't understand this. You started this discussion, I merely replied to the extent of my abilities. Then when I ask you to explain what you mean, you tell me you don't have the time to answer properly. Fine, but if you didn't, then why discuss all this at all. I understand what you are trying to do. I actually aplaud the effort to start some sort of enquiry here. You should ask yourself if it is only because of the rest of us here that it is not getting anywhere. > No opening? Krishnamurti came out of the theosophy movement. That > is an > obvious given. He left it because he could not use that as a > vehicle to > accomplish his aim, which was, if I am not mistaken, similar to, if > not the > very same aim as that of theosophy. He could not use it because it > was not > functional as a vehicle for accomplishing this. It is obvious - Katinka: That is, it is obvious about the Order of the Star of the East, not about the TS as a whole. More about that below. But one thing: you aren't Krishnamurti, you have your own path. That Krishnaji's message, in his time and position was better served by leaving the Order of the Star, and perhaps the TS, does not mean that this is true for everybody else, does it? Gosh, so far we are almost in agreement. In fact, you are in this agreeing a lot with those theosophists I know (which aren't represented all that much online, but there are many) that are interested in both theosophy and Krishnamurti. You may want to read the following on my website: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/other/jjleeuw.htm > If you or I > understand something it might be a good idea to try to explain it > in our own > words. If we cannot do that, maybe we can learn by practicing. I do that all the time. You know that. But as long as your point isn't clear, I can hardly see where you are coming from and frame a decent response. > You have called theosophy a RELIGION. Which was a slip of the pen. I appologize. it is very clear that Blavatsky never meant for theosophy to be a religion. It is also clear that the major influence theosophy has had over the past century has not been as a religion, but as a reservoir of people and ideas mixing more freely than elsewhere. > Other people may want you to follow > THEIR religions because they think they are better. There is no way > to sort > it out. This all leads to war. Krishnamurti had to leave. He could > not be a > world teacher under those conditions. No one would have listened. Oh, is that it. You are bunking theosophy as a whole (including the TS and Blavatsky) because Krishnamurti left the order of the Star? Can you think of nothing more original? It is rumoured, though I don't know the truth of it, that Krishnamurti only left the TS because he was pushed to by some of the then-leaders. > It does > not matter when Madame Blavatsky predicted a world teacher would > come. Well it does, in so far as you are somehow making her responsible for what came after. I still fail to see how Blavatsky is linked to the whole order of the star thing. > She, too, like you and I, was no authority. Nor did she claim to be. But when you want to link her work to what came after, you have to show such a link exists. And the mere fact that it is the same organisation that does something, does not mean you can blame blavatsky for it. > Yoiu cannot prove anything except > perhaps the truth of what I say by asking me to read Sanat. I asked you to read Sanat because it seemed to me you were ill- informed. That is all. I think after reading his work you might be a bit more capable of explaining your precise point and basing it on something. > It is not > enquiry. At least the subject of what is and is not enquiry has > come up here. Is that your motive? To bring up the question of what genuine enquiry is? Why not ask that question then? > Wry p.s. Please tell me where to find Daniel's message, which I have > missed seeing. I meant the following message: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10752 It contains a link to the original article by Geoffrey Farthing, wich in turn discusses theosophy and Krishnamurti. Katinka From dalval14@earthlink.net Sat Feb 01 03:13:20 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 94662 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:19 -0000 Received: from pool0041.cvx38-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.30.41] helo=earthlink) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18eva5-00074i-00; Sat, 01 Feb 2003 03:13:05 -0800 To: "AA-BN--Study" Subject: Conversations on Occultism 8 to 13 Part 1 Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 03:07:47 -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) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Part I ======================================== 8 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM OCCULT VIBRATIONS A FRAGMENT OF CONVERSATION WITH H.P.B. IN 1888 The following was written by me at the dictation of H.P.B. in 1888 with the purpose of printing it at that time. But it was not used then, and as I brought it home with me it is now of interest. - W.Q.J. Q. - It has struck me while thinking over the difference between ordinary people and an adept or even a partly developed student, that the rate of vibration of the brain molecules, as well as he coördination of those with the vibrations of the higher brain, may lie at the bottom of the difference and also might explain many other problems. H.P.B. - So they do. They make differences and also cause many curious phenomena; and the differences among all persons are greatly due to vibrations of all kinds. Q. - In reading the article ["Aum!"] in the PATH of April, 1886, this idea was again suggested. I open at p. 6, Vol. I. The divine Resonance spoken of above is not the Divine Light itself. The Resonance is only the outbreathing of the first sound of the entire Aum.... It manifests itself not only as the power which stirs up and animates the particles of the universe, but also in the evolution and dissolution of man, of the animal and mineral kingdoms, and the Solar system. Among the Aryans it was represented by the planet Mercury, who has always been said to govern the intellectual faculties and to be the universal stimulator. What of this? H.P.B. - Mercury was always known as the god of secret wisdom. He is Hermes as well as Budha the son of Soma. Speaking of matters on the lower plane, I would call the "Divine Resonance" you read of in the PATH "vibrations" and the originator, or that which gives the impulse to every kind of phenomena in the astral plane. Q. - The differences found in human brains and natures must, then, have their root in differences of vibration? H.P.B. - Most assuredly so. Q. - Speaking of mankind as a whole, is it true that all have one key or rate of vibration to which they respond? H.P.B. - Human beings in general are like so many keys on the piano, each having its own sound, and the combination of which produces other sounds in endless variety. Like inanimate nature they have a key-note from which all the varieties of character and constitution proceed by endless changes. Remember what was said in Isis Unveiled at p. 16, Vol. I, "The Universe is the combination of a thousand elements, and yet the expression of a single spirit, - a chaos to the sense (physical), a cosmos to the reason" (manas). Q. - So far this applies generally to nature. Does it explain the difference between the adept and ordinary people? H.P.B. - Yes. This difference is that an adept may be compared to that one key which contains all the keys in the great harmony of nature. He has the synthesis of all keys in his thoughts, whereas ordinary man has the same key as a basis, but only acts and thinks on one or a few changes of this great key, producing with his brain only a few chords out of the whole great possible harmony. Q. - Has this something to do with the fact that a disciple may hear the voice of his master through the astral spaces, while another man cannot hear or communicate with the adepts? H.P.B. - This is because the brain of a chela is attuned by training to the brain of the Master. His vibrations synchronize with those of the Adept, and the untrained brain is not so attuned. So the chela's brain is abnormal, looking at it from the standpoint of ordinary life, while that of the ordinary man is normal for worldly purposes. The latter person may be compared to those who are color-blind. Q. - How am I to understand this? H.P.B. - What is considered normal from the view of the physician is considered abnormal from the view of occultism, and vice versâ. The difference between a color-blind signal man who mistakes the lamps and the adept who sees is that the one takes one color for another, while the adept sees all the colors in every color and yet does not confuse them together. Q. - Has the adept, then, raised his vibrations so as to have them the same as those of nature as a whole? H.P.B. - Yes; the highest adepts. But there are other adepts who, while vastly in advance of all men, are still unable to vibrate to such a degree. Q. - Can the adept produce at his will a vibration which will change one color to another? H.P.B. - He can produce a sound which will alter a color. It is the sound which produces the color, and not the other or opposite. By correlating the vibrations of a sound in the proper way a new color is made. Q. - Is it true that on the astral plane every sound always produces a color? H.P.B. - Yes; but these are invisible because not yet correlated by the human brain so as to become visible on the earth plane. Read Galton, who gives experiments with colors and sounds as seen by psychics and sensitives, showing that many sensitive people always see a color for every sound. The color-blind man has coming to him the same vibrations as will show red, but not being able to sense these he alters the amount, so to say, and then sees a color corresponding to the vibrations he can perceive out of the whole quantity. His astral senses may see the true color, but the physical eye has its own vibrations, and these, being on the outer plane, overcome the others for the time, and the astral man is compelled to report to the brain that it saw correctly. For in each case the outer stimulus is sent to the inner man, who then is forced, as it were, to accept the message and to confirm it for the time so far as it goes. But there are cases where the inner man is able to even then overcome the outer defect and to make the brain see the difference. In many cases of lunacy the confusion among the vibrations of all kinds is so enormous that there is not correlation between the inner and the outer man, and we have then a case of aberration. But even in some of these unfortunate cases the person inside is all the time aware that he is not insane but cannot make himself be understood. Thus often persons are driven really insane by wrong treatment. Q. - By what manner of vibrations do the elementals make colors and lights of variety? H.P.B. - That is a question I cannot reply to though it is well known to me. Did I not tell you that secrets might be revealed too soon? Path, June, 1893 (W. Q. Judge) ======================================== 9 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM OCCULT TEACHINGS Student. - What is Occultism? Sage. - It is that branch of knowledge which shows the universe in the form of an egg. The cell of science is a little copy of the egg of the universe. The laws which govern the whole govern also every part of it. As man is a little copy of the universe - is the microcosm - he is governed by the same laws which rule the greater. Occultism teaches therefore of the secret laws and forces of the universe and man, those forces playing in the outer world and known in part only by the men of the day who admit no invisible real nature, behind which is the model of the visible. Student. - What does Occultism teach in regard to man, broadly speaking? Sage. - That he is the highest product of evolution, and hence has in him a centre or focus corresponding to each centre of force or power in the universe. He therefore has as many centres or foci for force, power, and knowledge as there are such in the greater world about and within. Student. - Do you mean to include also the ordinary run of men, or is it the exceptions you refer to? Sage. - I include every human being, and that will reach from the lowest to the very highest, both those we know and those beyond us who are suspected as being in existence. Although we are accustomed to confine the term "human" to this earth, it is not correct to confine that sort of being to this plane or globe, because other planets have beings the same as ours in essential power and nature and possibility. Student. - Please explain a little more particularly what you mean by our having centres or foci in us. Sage. - Electricity is a most powerful force not fully known to modern science, yet used very much. The nervous, physical, and mental systems of man acting together are able to produce the same force exactly, and in a finer as well as subtler way and to as great a degree as the most powerful dynamo, so that the force might be used to kill, to alter, to move, or otherwise change any object or condition. This is the "vril" described by Bulwer Lytton in his Coming Race. Nature exhibits to our eyes the power of drawing into one place with fixed limits any amount of material so as to produce the smallest natural object or the very largest. Out of the air she takes what is already there, and by compressing it into the limits of tree or animal form makes it visible to our material eyes. This is the power of condensing into what may be known as the ideal limits, that is, into the limits of the form which is ideal. Man has this same power, and can, when he knows the laws and the proper centres of force in himself, do precisely what Nature does. He can thus make visible and material what was before ideal and invisible by filling the ideal form with the matter condensed from the air. In his case the only difference from Nature is that he does quickly what she brings about slowly. Among natural phenomena there is no present illustration of telepathy good for our use. Among the birds and the beasts, however, there is telepathy instinctually performed. But telepathy, as it is now called, is the communicating of thought or idea from mind to mind. This is a natural power, and being well-understood may be used by one mind to convey to another, no matter how far away or what be the intervening obstacle, any idea or thought. In natural things we can take for that the vibration of the chord which can cause all other chords of the same length to vibrate similarly. This is a branch of Occultism, a part of which is known to the modern investigator. But it is also one of the most useful and one of the greatest powers we have. To make it of service many things have to combine. While it is used every day in common life in the average way - for men are each moment telepathically communicating with each other - to do it in perfection, that is, against obstacle and distance, is perfection of occult art. Yet it will be known one day even to the common world. Student. - Is there any object had in view by Nature which man should also hold before him? Sage. - Nature ever works to turn the inorganic or the lifeless or the non-intelligent and non-conscious into the organic, the intelligent, the conscious; and this should be the aim of man also. In her great movements Nature seems to cause destruction, but that is only for the purpose of construction. The rocks are dissolved into earth, elements combine to bring on change, but there is the ever onward march of progress in evolution. Nature is not destructive of either thing or time, she is constructive. Man should be the same. And as a free moral agent he should work to that end, and not to procuring gratification merely nor for waste in any department. Student. - Is Occultism of truth or of falsehood; is it selfish or unselfish; or is it part one and part the other? Sage. - Occultism is colorless, and only when used by man for the one side or the other is it good or bad. Bad Occultism, or that which is used for selfish ends, is not false, for it is the same as that which is for good ends. Nature is two-sided, negative and positive, good and bad, light and dark, hot and cold, spirit and matter. The Black magician is as powerful in the matter of phenomena as the White, but in the end all the trend of Nature will go to destroy the black and save the white. But what you should understand is that the false man and the true can both be occultists. The words of the Christian teacher Jesus will give the rule for judgment: "By their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles?" Occultism is the general, all-inclusive term, the differentiating terms are White and Black; the same forces are used by both, and similar laws, for there are no special laws in this universe for any special set of workers in Nature's secrets. But the path of the untruthful and the wicked, while seemingly easy at first, is hard at last, for the black workers are the friends of no one, they are each against the other as soon as interest demands, and that may be anytime. It is said that final annihilation of the personal soul awaits those who deal in the destructive side of Nature's hall of experience. Student. - Where should I look for the help I need in the right life, the right study? Sage. - Within yourself is the light that lighteth every man who cometh here. The light of the Higher Self and of the Mahâtma are not different from each other. Unless you find your Self, how can you understand Nature? Path, October, 1894 (W. Q. Judge) =========================================== 10 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM THE POWER TO KNOW Student. - What is the effect of trying to develop the power of seeing in the astral light before a person is initiated? Sage. - Seeing in the astral light is not done through Manas, but through the senses, and hence has to do entirely with sense-perception removed to a plane different from this, but more illusionary. The final perceiver or judge of perception is in Manas, in the Self; and therefore the final tribunal is clouded by the astral perception if one is not so far trained or initiated as to know the difference and able to tell the true from the false. Another result is a tendency to dwell on this subtle sense-perception, which at last will cause an atrophy of Manas for the time being. This makes the confusion all the greater, and will delay any possible initiation all the more or forever. Further, such seeing is in the line of phenomena, and adds to the confusion of the Self which is only beginning to understand this life; by attempting the astral another element of disorder is added by more phenomena due to another plane, thus mixing both sorts up. The Ego must find its basis and not be swept off hither and thither. The constant reversion of images and ideas in the astral light, and the pranks of the elementals there, unknown to us as such and only seen in effects, still again add to the confusion. To sum it up, the real danger from which all others flow or follow is in the confusion of the Ego by introducing strange things to it before the time. Student. - How is one to know when he gets real occult information from the Self within? Sage. - Intuition must be developed and the matter judged from the true philosophical basis, for if it is contrary to true general rules it is wrong. It has to be known from a deep and profound analysis by which we find out what is from egotism alone and what is not; if it is due to egotism, then it is not from the Spirit and is untrue. The power to know does not come from book-study nor from mere philosophy, but mostly from the actual practice of altruism in deed, word, and thought; for that practice purifies the covers of the soul and permits that light to shine down into the brain-mind. As the brain-mind is the receiver in the waking state, it has to be purified from sense-perception, and the truest way to do this is by combining philosophy with the highest outward and inward virtue. Student. - Tell me some ways by which intuition is to be developed. Sage. - First of all by giving it exercise, and second by not using it for purely personal ends. Exercise means that it must be followed through mistakes and bruises until from sincere attempts at use it comes to its own strength. This does not mean that we can do wrong and leave the results, but that after establishing conscience on a right basis by following the golden rule, we give play to the intuition and add to its strength. Inevitably in this at first we will make errors, but soon if we are sincere it will grow brighter and make no mistake. We should add the study of the works of those who in the past have trodden this path and found out what is the real and what is not. They say the Self is the only reality. The brain must be given larger views of life, as by the study of the doctrine of reincarnation, since that gives a limitless field to the possibilities in store. We must not only be unselfish, but must do all the duties that Karma has given us, and thus intuition will point out the road of duty and the true path of life. Student. - Are there any Adepts in America or Europe? Sage. - Yes, there are and always have been. But they have for the present kept themselves hidden from the public gaze. The real ones have a wide work to do in many departments of life and in preparing certain persons who have a future work to do. Though their influence is wide they are not suspected, and that is the way they want to work for the present. There are some also who are at work with certain individuals in some of the aboriginal tribes in America, as among those are Egos who are to do still more work in another incarnation, and they must be prepared for it now. Nothing is omitted by these Adepts. In Europe it is the same way, each sphere of work being governed by the time and the place. Student. -What is the meaning of the five-pointed star? Sage. - It is the symbol of the human being who is not an Adept, but is now on the plane of the animal nature as to his life-thoughts and development inside. Hence it is the symbol of the race. Upside down it means death or symbolizes that. It also means, when upside down, the other or dark side. It is at the same time the cross endowed with the power of mind, that is, man. Student. - Is there a four-pointed star symbol? Sage. - Yes. That is the symbol of the next kingdom below man, and pertains to the animals. The right kind of clairvoyant can see both the five- and the four-pointed star. It is all produced by the intersections of the lines or currents of the astral light emanating from the person or being. The four-pointed one means that the being having but it has not as yet developed Manas. Student. - Has the mere figure of a five-pointed star any power in itself? Sage. - It has some, but very little. You see it is used by all sorts of people for trademarks and the like, and for the purposes of organizations, yet no result follows. It must be actually used by the mind to be of any force or value. If so used, it carries with it the whole power of the person to whom it may belong. Student. - Why is the sword so much spoken of in practical Occultism by certain writers? Sage. - Many indeed of these writers merely repeat what they have read. But there is a reason, just as in warfare the sword has more use for damage than a club. The astral light corresponds to water. if you try to strike in or under water with a club, it will be found that there is but little result, but a sharp knife will cut almost as well under water as out of it. The friction is less. So in the astral light a sword used on that plane has more power to cut than a club has, and an elemental for that reason will be more easily damaged by a sword than by a club or a stone. But all of this relates to things that are of no right value to the true student, and are indulged in only by those who work in dark magic or foolishly by those who do not quite know what they do. It is certain that he who uses the sword or the club will be at last hurt by it. And the lesson to be drawn is that we must seek for the true Self that knows all Occultism and all truth, and has in itself the protecting shield from all dangers. That is what the ancient Sages sought and found, and that is what should be striven after by us. Path, November, 1894 (W. Q. Judge) =========================================== 10 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM MENTAL DISCIPLINE Student. - Is there not some attitude of mind which one should in truth assume in order to understand the occult in Nature? Sage. - Such attitude of mind must be attained as will enable one to look into the realities of things. The mind must escape from the mere formalities and conventions of life, even though outwardly one seems to obey all of them, and should be firmly established on the truth that Man is a copy of the Universe and has in himself a portion of the Supreme Being. To the extent this is realized will be the clearness of perception of truth. A realization of this leads inevitably to the conclusion that all other men and beings are united with us, and this removes the egotism which is the result of the notion of separateness. When the truth of Unity is understood, then distinctions due to comparisons made like the Pharisee's, that one is better than his neighbor, disappear from the mind, leaving it more pure and free to act. Student. - What would you point out as a principal foe to the mind's grasping of truth? Sage. - The principal foe of a secondary nature is what was once called phantasy; that is, the reappearance of thoughts and images due to recollection or memory. Memory is an important power, but mind in itself is not memory. Mind is restless and wandering in its nature, and must be controlled. Its wandering disposition is necessary or stagnation would result. But it can be controlled and fixed upon an object or idea. Now as we are constantly looking at and hearing of new things, the natural restlessness of the mind becomes prominent when we set about pinning it down. Then memory of many objects, things, subjects, duties, persons, circumstances, and affairs brings up before it the various pictures and thoughts belonging to them. After these the mind at once tries to go, and we find ourselves wandering from the point. It must hence follow that the storing of a multiplicity of useless and surely-recurring thoughts is an obstacle to the acquirement of truth. And this obstacle is the very one peculiar to our present style of life. Student. - Can you mention some of the relations in which the sun stands to us and nature in respect to Occultism? Sage. - It has many such, and all important. But I would draw your attention first to the greater and more comprehensive. The sun is the center of our solar system. The life-energies of that system come to it through the sun, which is a focus or reflector for the spot in space where the real center is. And not only comes mere life through that focus, but also much more that is spiritual in its essence. The sun should therefore not only be looked at with the eye but thought of by the mind. It represents to the world what the Higher Self is to the man. It is the soul-center of the world with its six companions, as the Higher Self is the center for the six principles of man. So it supplies to those six principles of the man many spiritual essences and powers. He should for that reason think of it and not confine himself to gazing at it. So far as it acts materially in light, heat, and gravity, it will go on of itself, but man as a free agent must think upon it in order to gain what benefit can come only from his voluntary action in thought. Student. - Will you refer to some minor one? Sage. - Well, we sit in the sun for heat and possible chemical effects. But if at the same time that we do this we also think on it as the sun in the sky and of its possible essential nature, we thereby draw from it some of its energy not otherwise touched. This can also be done on a dark day when clouds obscure the sky, and some of the benefit thus be obtained. Natural mystics, learned and ignorant, have discovered this for themselves here and there, and have often adopted the practice. But it depends, as you see, upon the mind. Student. - Does the mind actually do anything when it takes up a thought and seeks for more light? Sage. - It actually does. A thread, or a finger, or a long darting current flies out from the brain to seek for knowledge. It goes in all directions and touches all other minds it can reach so as to receive the information if possible. This is telepathically, so to say, accomplished. There are no patents on true knowledge of philosophy nor copyrights in that realm. Personal rights of personal life are fully respected, save by potential black magicians who would take anyone's property. But general truth belongs to all, and when the unseen messenger from one mind arrives and touches the real mind of another, that other gives up to it what it may have of truth about general subjects. So the mind's finger or wire flies until it gets the thought or seed-thought from the other and makes it its own. But our modern competitive system and selfish desire for gain and fame is constantly building a wall around people's minds to everyone's detriment. Student. - Do you mean that the action you describe is natural, usual, and universal, or only done by those who know how and are conscious of it? Sage. - It is universal and whether the person is aware or not of what is going on. Very few are able to perceive it in themselves, but that makes no difference. It is done always. When you sit down to earnestly think on a philosophical or ethical matter, for instance, your mind flies off, touching other minds, and from them you get varieties of thought. If you are not well-balanced and psychically purified, you will often get thoughts that are not correct. Such is your Karma and the Karma of the race. But if you are sincere and try to base yourself on right philosophy, your mind will naturally reject wrong notions. You can see in this how it is that systems of thought are made and kept going, even though foolish, incorrect, or pernicious. Student. - What mental attitude and aspiration are the best safeguards in this, as likely to aid the mind in these searches to reject error and not let it fly into the brain? Sage. - Unselfishness, Altruism in theory and practice, desire to do the will of the Higher Self which is the "Father in Heaven," devotion to the human race. Subsidiary to these are discipline, correct thinking, and good education. Student. - Is the uneducated man, then, in a worse condition? Sage. - Not necessarily so. The very learned are so immersed in one system that they reject nearly all thoughts not in accord with preconceived notions. The sincere ignorant one is often able to get the truth but not able to express it. The ignorant masses generally hold in their minds the general truths of Nature, but are limited as to expression. And most of the best discoveries of scientific men have been obtained in this sub-conscious telepathic mode. Indeed, they often arrive in the learned brain from some obscure and so-called ignorant person, and then the scientific discoverer makes himself famous because of his power of expression and means for giving it out. Student. - Does this bear at all upon the work of the Adepts of all good Lodges? Sage. - It does. They have all the truths that could be desired, but at the same time are able to guard them from the seeking minds of those who are not yet ready to use them properly. But they often find the hour ripe and a scientific man ready, and then touch his cogitating mind with a picture of what he seeks. He then has a "flash" of thought in the line of his deliberations, as many of them have admitted. He gives it out to the world, becomes famous, and the world wiser. This is constantly done by the Adepts, but now and then they give out larger expositions of Nature's truths, as in the case of H.P.B. This is not at first generally accepted, as personal gain and fame are not advanced by any admission of benefit from the writings of another, but as it is done with a purpose, for the use of a succeeding century, it will do its work at the proper time. Student. - How about the Adepts knowing what is going on in the world of thought, in the West, for instance? Sage. - They have only to voluntarily and consciously connect their minds with those of the dominant thinkers of the day to at once discover what has been or is being worked out in thought and to review it all. This they constantly do, and as constantly incite to further elaborations or changes by throwing out the suggestion in the mental plane so that seeking and receptive minds may use it. Path, December, 1894 (W. Q. Judge) ===================================== From dalval14@earthlink.net Sat Feb 01 03:13:21 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 76699 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:21 -0000 Received: from pool0041.cvx38-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.30.41] helo=earthlink) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18evaJ-00074i-00; Sat, 01 Feb 2003 03:13:19 -0800 To: "AA-BN--Study" Subject: Man's evolution A SPIRITUAL PILGRIMAGE by an IMMORTAL CNSCIOUSNESS Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 03:08:31 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In The SECRET DOCTRINE H.P.Blavatsky gives us in brief a synopsis of our condition and potential: She says: =93Starting upon the long journey immaculate; descending more and more into sinful matter, and having connected himself with every atom in manifested Space -- the Pilgrim, having struggled through and suffered in every form of life and being, is only at the bottom of the valley of matter, and half through his cycle, when he has identified himself with collective Humanity. This, he has made in his own image. In order to progress upwards and homewards, the "God" has now to ascend the weary uphill path of the Golgotha of Life. It is the martyrdom of self-conscious existence. Like Visvakarman he has to sacrifice himself to himself in order to redeem all creatures, to resurrect from the many into the One Life. Then he ascends into heaven indeed; where, plunged into the incomprehensible absolute Being and Bliss of Paranirvana, he reigns unconditionally, and whence he will re-descend again at the next "coming," which one portion of humanity expects in its dead-letter sense as the second advent, and the other as the last "Kalki Avatar." S D I 268 Best wishes, Dallas [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dalval14@earthlink.net Sat Feb 01 03:13:38 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 4162 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 11:13:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 11:13:38 -0000 Received: from pool0041.cvx38-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.30.41] helo=earthlink) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18evaY-00074i-00; Sat, 01 Feb 2003 03:13:34 -0800 To: "AA-BN--Study" Subject: Conversations on Occultism 8 - 13 Part II Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 03:08:34 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Part II ------------------------------------- 12 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM RULES IN OCCULTISM Student. - Are there any rules, binding on all, in white magic or good occultism? I mean rules similar to the ten commandments of the Christians, or the rules for the protection of life, liberty, and property recognized by human law. Sage. - There are such rules of the most stringent character, the breaking of which is never wiped out save by expiation. Those rules are not made up by some brain or mind, but flow from the laws of nature, of mind, and of soul. Hence they are impossible of nullification. One may break them and seem to escape for a whole life or for more than a life; but the very breaking of them sets in motion at once other causes which begin to make effects, and most unerringly those effects at last react on the violator. Karma here acts as it does elsewhere, and becomes a Nemesis who, though sometimes slow, is fate itself in its certainty. Student. - It is not, then, the case that when an occultist violates a rule some other adept or agent starts out like a detective or policeman and brings the culprit to justice at a bar or tribunal such as we sometimes read of in the imaginative works of mystical writers or novelists? Sage. - No, there is no such pursuit. On the contrary, all the fellow-adepts or students are but too willing to aid the offender, not in escaping punishment, but in sincerely trying to set counteracting causes in motion for the good of all. For the sin of one reacts on the whole human family. If, however, the culprit does not wish to do the amount of counteracting good, he is merely left alone to the law of nature, which is in fact that of his own inner life from which there can be no escape. In Lytton's novel, Zanoni, you will notice the grave Master, Mejnour, trying to aid Zanoni, even at the time when the latter was falling slowly but surely into the meshes twisted by himself that ended in his destruction. Mejnour knew the law and so did Zanoni. The latter was suffering from some former error which he had to work out; the former, if himself too stern and unkind, would later on come to the appropriate grief for such a mistake. But meanwhile he was bound to help his friend, as are all those who really believe in brotherhood. Student. - What one of those rules in any way corresponds to "Thou shalt not steal"? Sage. - That one which was long ago expressed by the ancient sage in the words, "Do not covet the wealth of any creature." This is better than "Thou shalt not steal," for you cannot steal unless you covet. If you steal for hunger you may be forgiven, but you coveted the food for a purpose, just as another covets merely for the sake of possession. The wealth of others includes all their possessions, and does not mean mere money alone. Their ideas, their private thoughts, their mental forces, powers, and faculties, their psychic powers - all, indeed, on all planes that they own or have. While they in that realm are willing to give it all away, it must not be coveted by another. You have no right, therefore, to enter into the mind of another who has not given the permission and take from him what is not yours. You become a burglar on the mental and psychic plane when you break this rule. You are forbidden taking anything for personal gain, profit, advantage, or use. But you may take what is for general good, if you are far enough advanced and good enough to be able to extricate the personal element from it. This rule would, you can see, cut off all those who are well known to every observer, who want psychic powers for themselves and their own uses. If such persons had those powers of inner sight and hearing that they so much want, no power could prevent them from committing theft on the unseen planes wherever they met a nature that was not protected. And as most of us are very far from perfect, so far, indeed, that we must work for many lives, yet the Masters of Wisdom do not aid our defective natures in the getting of weapons that would cut our own hands. For the law acts implacably, and the breaches made would find their end and result in long after years. The Black Lodge, however, is very willing to let any poor, weak, or sinful mortal get such power, because that would swell the number of victims they so much require. Student. - Is there any rule corresponding to "Thou shalt not bear false witness"? Sage. - Yes; the one which requires you never to inject into the brain of another a false or untrue thought. As we can project our thoughts to another's mind, we must not throw untrue ones to another. It comes before him, and he, overcome by its strength perhaps, finds it echoing in him, and it is a false witness speaking falsely within, confusing and confounding the inner spectator who lives on thought. Student. - How can one prevent the natural action of the mind when pictures of the private lives of others rise before one? Sage. - That is difficult for the run of men. Hence the mass have not the power in general; it is kept back as much as possible. But when the trained soul looks about in the realm of soul it is also able to direct its sight, and when it finds rising up a picture of what it should not voluntarily take, it turns its face away. A warning comes with all such pictures which must be obeyed. This is not a rare rule or piece of information, for there are many natural clairvoyants who know it very well, though many of them do not think that others have the same knowledge. Student. - What do you mean by a warning coming with the picture? Sage. - In this realm the slightest thought becomes a voice or a picture. All thoughts make pictures. Every person has his private thoughts and desires. Around these he makes also a picture of his wish for privacy, and that to the clairvoyant becomes a voice or picture of warning which seems to say it must be let alone. With some it may assume the form of a person who says not to approach, with others it will be a voice, with still others a simple but certain knowledge that the matter is sacred. All these varieties depend on the psychological idiosyncrasies of the seer. Student. - What kind of thought or knowledge is excepted from these rules? Sage. - General, and philosophical, religious, and moral. That is to say, there is no law of copyright or patent which is purely human in invention and belongs to the competitive system. When a man thinks out truly a philosophical problem it is not his under the laws of nature; it belongs to all; he is not in this realm entitled to any glory, to any profit, to any private use in it. Hence the seer may take as much of it as he pleases, but must on his part not claim it or use it for himself. Similarly with other generally beneficial matters. They are for all. If a Spencer thinks out a long series of wise things good for all men, the seer can take them all. Indeed, but few thinkers do any original thinking. They pride themselves on doing so, but in fact their seeking minds go out all over the world of mind and take from those of slower movement what is good and true, and then make them their own, sometimes gaining glory, sometimes money, and in this age claiming all as theirs and profiting by it. Path, January, 1895 (W. Q. Judge) ================================== 13 CONVERSATIONS ON OCCULTISM THE POWER TO KNOW Student. - What is the effect of trying to develop the power of seeing in the astral light before a person is initiated? Sage. - Seeing in the astral light is not done through Manas, but through the senses, and hence has to do entirely with sense-perception removed to a plane different from this, but more illusionary. The final perceiver or judge of perception is in Manas, in the Self; and therefore the final tribunal is clouded by the astral perception if one is not so far trained or initiated as to know the difference and able to tell the true from the false. Another result is a tendency to dwell on this subtle sense-perception, which at last will cause an atrophy of Manas for the time being. This makes the confusion all the greater, and will delay any possible initiation all the more or forever. Further, such seeing is in the line of phenomena, and adds to the confusion of the Self which is only beginning to understand this life; by attempting the astral another element of disorder is added by more phenomena due to another plane, thus mixing both sorts up. The Ego must find its basis and not be swept off hither and thither. The constant reversion of images and ideas in the astral light, and the pranks of the elementals there, unknown to us as such and only seen in effects, still again add to the confusion. To sum it up, the real danger from which all others flow or follow is in the confusion of the Ego by introducing strange things to it before the time. Student. - How is one to know when he gets real occult information from the Self within? Sage. - Intuition must be developed and the matter judged from the true philosophical basis, for if it is contrary to true general rules it is wrong. It has to be known from a deep and profound analysis by which we find out what is from egotism alone and what is not; if it is due to egotism, then it is not from the Spirit and is untrue. The power to know does not come from book-study nor from mere philosophy, but mostly from the actual practice of altruism in deed, word, and thought; for that practice purifies the covers of the soul and permits that light to shine down into the brain-mind. As the brain-mind is the receiver in the waking state, it has to be purified from sense-perception, and the truest way to do this is by combining philosophy with the highest outward and inward virtue. Student. - Tell me some ways by which intuition is to be developed. Sage. - First of all by giving it exercise, and second by not using it for purely personal ends. Exercise means that it must be followed through mistakes and bruises until from sincere attempts at use it comes to its own strength. This does not mean that we can do wrong and leave the results, but that after establishing conscience on a right basis by following the golden rule, we give play to the intuition and add to its strength. Inevitably in this at first we will make errors, but soon if we are sincere it will grow brighter and make no mistake. We should add the study of the works of those who in the past have trodden this path and found out what is the real and what is not. They say the Self is the only reality. The brain must be given larger views of life, as by the study of the doctrine of reincarnation, since that gives a limitless field to the possibilities in store. We must not only be unselfish, but must do all the duties that Karma has given us, and thus intuition will point out the road of duty and the true path of life. Student. - Are there any Adepts in America or Europe? Sage. - Yes, there are and always have been. But they have for the present kept themselves hidden from the public gaze. The real ones have a wide work to do in many departments of life and in preparing certain persons who have a future work to do. Though their influence is wide they are not suspected, and that is the way they want to work for the present. There are some also who are at work with certain individuals in some of the aboriginal tribes in America, as among those are Egos who are to do still more work in another incarnation, and they must be prepared for it now. Nothing is omitted by these Adepts. In Europe it is the same way, each sphere of work being governed by the time and the place. Student. -What is the meaning of the five-pointed star? Sage. - It is the symbol of the human being who is not an Adept, but is now on the plane of the animal nature as to his life-thoughts and development inside. Hence it is the symbol of the race. Upside down it means death or symbolizes that. It also means, when upside down, the other or dark side. It is at the same time the cross endowed with the power of mind, that is, man. Student. - Is there a four-pointed star symbol? Sage. - Yes. That is the symbol of the next kingdom below man, and pertains to the animals. The right kind of clairvoyant can see both the five- and the four-pointed star. It is all produced by the intersections of the lines or currents of the astral light emanating from the person or being. The four-pointed one means that the being having but it has not as yet developed Manas. Student. - Has the mere figure of a five-pointed star any power in itself? Sage. - It has some, but very little. You see it is used by all sorts of people for trademarks and the like, and for the purposes of organizations, yet no result follows. It must be actually used by the mind to be of any force or value. If so used, it carries with it the whole power of the person to whom it may belong. Student. - Why is the sword so much spoken of in practical Occultism by certain writers? Sage. - Many indeed of these writers merely repeat what they have read. But there is a reason, just as in warfare the sword has more use for damage than a club. The astral light corresponds to water. if you try to strike in or under water with a club, it will be found that there is but little result, but a sharp knife will cut almost as well under water as out of it. The friction is less. So in the astral light a sword used on that plane has more power to cut than a club has, and an elemental for that reason will be more easily damaged by a sword than by a club or a stone. But all of this relates to things that are of no right value to the true student, and are indulged in only by those who work in dark magic or foolishly by those who do not quite know what they do. It is certain that he who uses the sword or the club will be at last hurt by it. And the lesson to be drawn is that we must seek for the true Self that knows all Occultism and all truth, and has in itself the protecting shield from all dangers. That is what the ancient Sages sought and found, and that is what should be striven after by us. Path, November, 1894 (W. Q. Judge) =================================================== From mail@katinkahesselink.net Sat Feb 01 03:22:02 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 1 Feb 2003 11:22:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 83475 invoked from network); 1 Feb 2003 11:22:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Feb 2003 11:22:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.69) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Feb 2003 11:22:02 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.182] by n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Feb 2003 11:22:02 -0000 Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 11:21:58 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Re: Wry on Blavatsky part one Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001e01c2c75a$dbae1c00$57dbf7a5@idapingala> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 4875 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Katinka Hesselink " X-Originating-IP: 217.121.208.124 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92802723 X-Yahoo-Profile: katinka_hesselink Hi Wry, Will reply in between. --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "wry" wrote: > > Hi, > > > Respectfully, so you are not inspired by her writings, so what? Many > > people are. her Voice of the Silence ( > > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/voice/voice.htm ) is a booklet > > full of spiritual wisdom, and hardly confused. Then again, nobody is > > asking anybody to give up their religion. Theosophy "only" claims to > > help people get in touch with the spiritual dimension behind each > > religion. Granted, that is a huge claim, but I don't think you are in > > a position to judge Blavatskian theosophy, as of yet. Her work is > > complex and has absolutely no claim of even being complete. > > WRY: Actually, work has been amazingly easy to evaluate as the > flaws repeat > themselves over and over and stand out like a sore thumb, and > again, I have > never discounted thevalue of her work, but it is no longer time- > appropriate > and there are other problems. I am not saying her work is of no > value, but > it's major flaw is that it creates a strong affect, that of > eternalism, > which people easily get bonded to, and this form of eternalism, in > my > opinion, has nothing to do with transformation or what it is about, > and even retards it. Ok, hold a minute. What do you mean by eternalism? The rest of this becomes incomprehensible because you don't explain this. > Because I do not believe Madame Blavatsky completely understood > certain > concepts and how to communicate about certain ideas, it is > questionable to > me that her writing will help most people to get in touch with "the > spiritual dimension behind each religion." It is way too heady and > intellectual, among other things. It may even be better to > participate fully > in one religion and ponder its teachings. You are flying all over the place here. One moment you say religions lead to war, the other that it is best that people stick to one religion. Which is it? Anyhow, which concepts did Blavatsky not understand? Which concepts did she not communicate clearly. Let me rephrase that: of course her writings (especially Isis and the Secret Doctrine) are difficult works, and they aren't examples of how books are usually written. I mean, logic is missing, the threads intertwine and intercept, and only a glimmer of understanding is gleaned after years of studying, in most cases. I don't think anybody disputes this. Except, some people (myself among them) find in blavatsky, after those years of study, ideas and inspiration that just isn't found elsewhere (including Krishnamurti). That you haven't found that, does not mean her work is illconceaved. She had a reason for writing this way. Some of which can be found at: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/metaphys/th-bowen.htm > WRY: Maybe not much, now that you mention it, but he rejected > theosophy and there was a reason. The whole of Aryel Sanat's work seems dedicated to showing that he only rejected the theosophy he knew, which wasn't Blavatskyan theosophy, but Besant/Leadbeater/etc. theosophy. The differences are marked. Mostly the aim of these two streams is different. Blavastkyan theosophy aims at transformation, Besantian and Leadbeaterian theosophy seems content at ethical living. Not having studied that work, you lack in background reading. > Too bad a great world teacher who came out of that > movement could not continue to promote the movement, not that he was an > authority anymore than HBP, you or I, but his teaching was alive. He > explained things for anyone, so they could be changed, if they enquired > deeply. On this list we have people talking about being immortal and finding > the light and saying maybe we talked to Jesus in a previous incarnation. > There is little enquiry here, and also LOTS of infighting which has > nothing to do with me. Katinka: So, why are you here? What has their infighting to do with you? It is precisely why I have not been active on this list. But that does not mean all of theosophy is irrelavant for everybody. > > >You can hardly blame > > one theosophist for what another is saying. Theosophy is one of those > > religions where people can have totally opposite views of reality (or > > myth) and still be members, or even leaders of the Theosophical > > Society. > > WRY: IS it a religion? I don't think so. Katinka: agreed. see previous post. > > That freedom is a much cherished quality. > > WRY: Too bad I am afraid to speak what I see as the truth on here. Katinka: You speak of being afraid to speak the truth, but you are hardly the most quiet of people here. Anyhow - the other people are also free to speak their minds, even if it means they do a lot of infighting. I think that is why Eldon runs this list the way he does. I can respect that. Can you? Katinka From leonmaurer@aol.com Sat Feb 01 22:14:42 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 06:14:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 82809 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 06:14:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 06:14:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m09.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.164) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 06:14:42 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.f.8d6d291 (3842) for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 01:14:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 01:14:38 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World Wry on Blavatsky part one 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 28 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 Hi Wry, Pardon me if I appear to be blunt (although, I'll try to be polite :-) -- but your statements and assertions below, which seem to have little basis in facts, seem to me to be quite fallacious. And, also, appear as if you're trying to convince us that you know something theosophists don't, because they are following the wrong teacher. If so, does that mean you consider yourself the "right great world teacher" now ready to take her place? I wonder what AB and AAB, if they were still around, would say about that? :-) So, I also wonder if this isn't the first introduction to a hidden agenda with the purpose of trying to organize theosophists into a new religion -- using this forum as its focus -- with you as its high priestess? Hadn't AB already tried that -- and failed? Didn't AAB pick up AB's marbles -- and turn her pseudo theosophy, and DK's phony "white magic" into a "New Age" religion that attracts all the weak minded sheep who need a "leader" or "prophet" to bolster their "blind belief"? Didn't this self professed teacher further addle their minds with gobbledygook magic, and tell them they can save the world by ritual group prayer, by welcoming living messiahs, and accepting vicarious atonement's? Is that any different from all the other organized priest crafty religions that already exist? Is that the kind of new theosophical religion you want to introduce us to? Or, do you have a new twist? So, in any event, what gives you the idea that theosophists need a new religion in order to fullfill the three objects of the TM -- that they already feel is all they can do to "save the world" (or become the helpers of those who have a workable plan that might do so)? So, far no such "Master Magician" has shown up, and I don't expect one ever will... (At least in this forum. ;-) Are you that one? If so, what's the plan? Come up with a good one, and I'll be the first to climb aboard. But if you can't, what makes you think you can do better than AB or AAB -- especially, starting here, in an open forum where all the independent theosophical free thinkers hang out -- and who *know* how false any "organized religion" can be? Besides, what makes you assume that theosophy, as presented by the Masters through the medium of HPB, has ever been considered a "religion"? Why do you think the SD is subtitled, "A Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy"? In such a synthesis, which part of it comes first? Which is more necessary to know or practice? Isn't it self evident that they can't be separated? Or, do you have a different view of theosophy than most serious students do? Haven't you studied the SD in depth (as it should be, for one who professes to be a teacher of its "Secrets")? Haven't you read the Mahatma Letters? Or, are you just making all this up -- your "special knowledge," your connection with the same secret society as HPB, your new religion, etc. -- out of your own head? Where and what is your "Truth"? I've read all your letters to this and other forums, and as yet, while I know what you are implying you know, I do not see any evidence that you actually know what you are talking about. In fact, judging by your misjudgments of what theosophy actually teaches, I'm not sure you know anything useful at all from a theosophical, or even a scientific, philosophical or religious point of view. If not, I wonder why you have chosen this forum as your platform? Is it, that our contradictory arguments with each other and apparent separateness (which really isn't the case, since some of us are mavericks who like stirring pots to find out who's who and what's what ;-) makes us an easy target for someone who want's to bring us together in what she feels is the "proper" way to discuss and/or "practice" theosophy as a "religion"? Didn't HPB (and also, GB & JC) teach that we each have to practice our own individual religion or yoga, to follow our own individual path of necessity, and that we are each the only "leader" of our own personal "religion" -- with our own higher Self as its only High Priest and "unbiased observer"? Didn't JK say exactly the same thing after he broke away from AB's and CWL's so called, "theosophical religion" (the LCC)? So, what makes you think JK "broke away from HPB"? Wasn't it only that throwback, Christianized religious distortion of theosophy that he split from? And, didn't he, from then on, teach about traveling the same individual, self chosen "pathless path" that HPB pointed out to all her disciples right from the beginning? Haven't you even read her instructions given to WQJ and RC, as well as to all true theosophists in all her conversations and writings? How ignorant or knowledgeable are you of the real teachings of theosophy (and it's sister wisdom teachings of pure Hermetic occultism and alchemy)? What do you know about what HPB taught in her esoteric section? Have you read and understood her teachings in the "Transactions of the Blavatsky Lodge"? Don't you think you should study all her writings, before spouting off about the character of HPB, the wisdom of her teachings, or what the Theosophical Movement is all about? Maybe, if we actually knew what you keep beating around the bush implying that you know about theosophy and occultism -- some of us who really "know" might be able to help you find your path, or your place here, (or even give you a boost if you've already found it). But, wouldn't it be wise for you to understand that your path is not necessarily our path? Reading between the lines of HPB, who directly tells it as it is, whether symbolically or metaphorically, is not the same thing as reading between your lines... That appear to be nothing but word salads of vague implications and misdirected criticisms slippery sliding all around the issues without any direct transmission of useful information. Could it be, then, that its you who's the one "mixed up and immature"? If HPB didn't know how to present the ancient knowledge and wisdom properly, why don't you show us how she should have done it? Could it be that she's the one who has brought us the modern "time relevant" teaching, and its you who are sneakily and slyly trying to drag us back to a 12th century version of organized religion and worship of Gods and rituals -- that theosophy completely denies and deplores. So, maybe you should wake up, my fair lady, and start to either teach us something worthwhile about theosophy we don't already know, give us a useful yoga -- or tell us exactly what your hidden agenda is. So, far your intents, while intentionally cloudy on the surface, are as transparent as glass to some of us. My take is that you wish to capture the members of this forum as your own private ashram or sangha -- with you as the Guru-ji. Well, go ahead and try. It would be interesting to see whether or not you really can live up to what you imply about your profound occult wisdom (that you always seem to be ready to "talk about later" -- but never do). In the meantime, why don't you back up what you do say and show us how outdated theosophy really is? For starters, how about telling us where are its dogmas? What does it teach or present wrong? So far, as I see it, and in spite of your unfounded opinions to the contrary -- Theosophy is working just fine... Exactly the way the real Masters of the Great Light Brotherhood wanted it to go. And, I'm certain that they and their disciples and brothers (who are here watching you now ;-) would be perfectly satisfied if each true theosophist *independently* follows the three objects of the Theosophical Movement, thoroughly learns the Mysteries of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis (and, thus, the "magic" of "compassionate creation") while practicing the heart doctrine -- through their own "self devised and self determined study and efforts." Those that follow that path, as Krishnamurti did, need no conniving gurus to take charge of theosophy and turn it backwards into a group oriented religious order with all kinds of rituals, dogmas and worshipful Gods. All we need now is another AB, CWL, AAB, and their spinoff "false Prophets" to form another splinter group religion that parrots all the rest of the deific worshippers who can do nothing but engage in theological and physical wars among each other. That kind of separateness is the last thing theosophy, or the world needs. So, maybe you should go back and study what theosophy is all about and what it teaches before you try to fix what is not broken... Could this "fixing" be for the purpose of either satisfying your own personal ego -- or (intentionally or innocently) do the work of the Dugpas and false prophets? And, if so, is it your intention to split apart all the true, independent theosophists, by breaking their resolve to stick with the fundamental teachings of HPB, and turn them into sheep that get buried in your personal new religion -- that puts the starting point for spiritual enlightenment on the selfish "perfection of the physical plane." That's just the opposite of theosophy -- which sees all the planes as one trinity, quaternary, septenary, etc., that ALL have to be aligned and harmonized simultaneously to achieve self realization or enlightenment and, thereby, become useful to the Theosophical Movement. Although, there's nothing wrong with such bottom up "Zen" practices that you seem to be talking about... That is, so long as all the other levels of consciousness are equally worked on from the top down. But, that is just plain, all encompassing theosophy as taught by HPB and the Masters. So, do we really need your new religion? As far as I can see, all major organized religions have been "fine tuned all through the ages" and "turned into dogma" simply to maintain the positions and support of its crafty priests and their "insider" minions, property and infrastructures. So, let's not turn theosophy into that. Transcendence can come automatically when one "gets it" entirely on one's own. There's no such thing as true and lasting transcendence by ritual, or group worship -- for so long as the mind is not awakened to the true nature of reality, such ritually and "mob psychological" group induced ecstasy, mistaken as transcendence, is a will of the wisp... No more than an empty taste of the real thing -- that can only come about through devoted attention to one's self chosen path toward self realization and enlightenment. But, none of it can happen until one thoroughly knows the entire true nature (scientific, philosophical and religious) of what one is being enlightened about, why and what for. So, let's hope hope we can just leave it at that, and get on with theosophy -- as it was originally taught to those who taught HPB how to teach it to us at this time and place in human history and the state of human consciousness -- which I doubt has changed much in the last century from the way HPB saw it then, and predicted it would still be today. So, I hope you take all that in the true spirit of brotherhood. Considering the busyness of your work, please don't think you have to answer all the questions above... Most of which are purely rhetorical, and asked solely for the benefit of those theosophists not yet ready to think for themselves. :-) Best wishes, LHM In a message dated 01/28/03 3:11:13 PM, wry1111@earthlink.net writes: >Hi. I personally do not believe this is the time on earth for people to >practice individual religions, but most people will not give up their religion >until they have something to replace it with. All major organic religions >are designed, tested and fine-tuned over many hundreds of years by many >individuals, not just one, to convey material to individuals of various >levels of understanding by the means of allegory in story, art and ritual, >in such a way that it can be organically assimilated onto their functioning >in such a way that there is TRANSCENDENCE. True, when people interpret >this symbolism literally, it crystallizes into dogma, and this is a big >problem, but at least there is a change for certain material to be conveyed. > >With theosophy, it is different. It does NOT succeed in doing this.. Blavatsky >was too mixed up. She had certain knowledge, but did NOT understand how >to present it. She was quite developed in some ways, but in other ways, >she was spiritually IMMATURE. This is why the conditions she established, >as part of an interconnected continuum, led to what someone on here recently >dismissed as "the Krishnamurti incident." Any mature spiritual person would >need to reject her teaching in order to fulfil the prophecy of actually >becoming a great world teacher. > >Just as, if religion is not working, there is are reasons, so also, if >theosophy is not working there are reasons, but all of the reasons are >not exactly the same. I believe she was successful in that she brought >eastern teachings to the west at a certain time, but as far as achieving >the aim of a universal brotherhood, theosophy will not work unless there >is a different approach. I am willing to enquire into this with members >of this list. The Order Of The Star was dissolved by its leader. It is >over. You are acting as if still exists, but it does not. It is impossible >to work this all out without enquiring deeply. If no one is interested >in doing this, nothing will change. This is sad. > >No Buddhist, Hindu, Roman Catholic, Jew or Muslim or whatever is going >to give up his FINELY-TUNED, though perhaps time-appropriate religion, >which, at the very least, can create a state of deep reverence which resonates >within, no matter how imperfect it is, to read the confused writings of >Madame Blavatsky. In my opinion, theosophy in its present form will not >accomplish the aim for which it was designed. Wry From mail@katinkahesselink.net Sun Feb 02 01:52:35 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 09:52:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 46399 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 09:52:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 09:52:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.76) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 09:52:34 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.135] by n20.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Feb 2003 09:52:34 -0000 Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 09:52:31 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Jerry Schueler on "Bhakti Yoga" 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: 14333 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Katinka Hesselink " X-Originating-IP: 217.121.208.124 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=92802723 X-Yahoo-Profile: katinka_hesselink Dear Bhakti, I don't really believe you are still here, but will reply to this post anyhow, as I do agree with Daniel that you raise some valid points. First let met quote from a popular textbook on Buddhism: "The Buddhist Handbook" John Snelling. My version is from 1997 a reprint of the second edition. On page 156, in the section on Chinese Buddhism, it says: >> The Pure Land School (ching t'u) Principal text: The Smaller and Larger Sukhavati-vyuha Sutras. The devotees of this school venerated Amitabha (the Buddha of Infinite Light) and sought, not outright Nirvana, but rebirth in the Western Paradise or 'Pure Land' of Amitabha, also called Sukhavati. In that idyllic environment, no new negative karmic accumulations would be created and all existing ones would evaporate; Nirvana would be therefore just a short step away. At root, the school harked back to the notion expounded in early Buddhist cosmology that within a few hundred years of the Buddha's death a degenerate period would set in when Enlightenment would no longer be attainable by one's own efforts or 'self-power' (in Japanese jiriki) alone. One would therefore have to depend on external grace: in this case, the benign intercession of Amitabha. This represented the opposite of 'self-power', namely 'other- power'(tariki). It was also felt that there was in any case an element of egoism in the very idea of 'self-power': that one could win Enlightenment by one's own efforts alone. As that was basically the Hinayana outlook, Pure Land Buddhism reflected the Mahayana accomodation to devotional forms of practice. The mantric repetition of the name of Amitabha - 'O-mi-to-fo' (in Japanese: 'Namu-Amida- butsu') - was the central practice developed here. >> Which indeed sounds like Bhakti-like practice: a practice where divine intercession is sought. In a definition of bhakti that encompasses christianity, this should certainly be included. I do agree that devotional forms of religious practice is the kind of religious practice that is most popular. And Bhakti is the hindu (hindi?) word for that, so in that sense, I think you have a point. On the other hand, Jerry has a point that Christian devotees don't see nirvana as their ultimate goal, neither do Muslims, for that matter. So while the practice is similar, and the results are similar as well, it can indeed be argued that as the goal is different, the same label cannot be applied to both. On the other hand, from a theosophical perspective: any practice that teaches reliance on an outside power is exoteric by Blavatskian definition. Still, as many christians use their devotion to find real bliss and communion with the divine (probably their own higher selves), this practice is as popular as it is, probably precisely because the fact is that the divine is in all of us, and can be experienced by all of us. As for your other points, indeed Ramakrishna and Vivekananda were no Bhakti-yogi's. The first had a tantrist-instructor, and the second promoted a vedantic outlook. (source: An introduction to Hinduism, Gavin Flood, Cambridge, 1996) So from checking two of your assertions, it seems to me you are over all correct, where Jerry isn't. Though, I don't quote understand, is Jerry a member here or not??? Still - a theosophist usually sees in the outward and popular forms of religion, merely the cloack for esoteric wisdom found only by the few. Bhakti yoga, however defined, is clearly and exoteric form in its doctrines and explanations of experiences. Katinka --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Bhakti Ananda Goswami " wrote: > Dear Mr. Schueler, > > "Bhakti Yoga as I understand it, is a very special type of yoga and > is not all that popular. Probably its most famous proponent and > practitioner was Ramakrishna during the late 19th century India. " > > What is your qualification for this pronouncement? What is your > source ? Have one read one book about the Kali Tantrist Ramakrishna > and now think that this qualifies you? Do you know what Sahajiya and > Tantra are ? These are NOT Bhakti Yoga. Only complete outsiders who > know nothing about Vaishnavism or Sattvic Shaivism think that > Ramakrishna practiced Bhakti Yoga. There are innumerable Vaishnava > and Shaivite Saints who were on the sattvic Bhakti Path in India. > You could have mentioned any of them. They are so famous that they > are studied in universities all over the world. But you mention a > Mayavadi Tantrist as an example of Bhakti Yoga! > > Mahatma Gandhi was a Pranami and Rama Vaishnava Bhakti Yogi, and he > had hundreds of millions of followers who were also non-violent > Bhakti Yogis. He left this world with the Name of Rama on his last > breath. He, like most Vaishnava Bhaktas in India, recognised > Theistic Shaivites, Christians, Muslims and any other devotees of God > as being on the path of Bhakti Yoga. Where have you been all of this > time ? I have traveled the world lecturing on Gandhi and never met an > educated person who did not understand that Gandhi considered there > to be ONE GOD WOPSHIPED BY HINDUS, MUSLIMS and CHRISTIANS. Worship is > a generic Western term of course, but the 'worship' of Bhakti Yoga > includes the rarest heights of Bridal Mysticim and popular devotions, > or the simple love of a child as well. > > When say the above, you are 100% wrong, as the essence of Bhakti Yoga > is Other-centered devotion. Ramakrishna was a Mayavadi, whose > devotion was exoterically to Kali but esoterically to himself. He and > his followers taught monist impersonalism, which means that they were > not actually practicing Bhakti Yoga at all. Bhakti Yoga can not be > self-centered. Such self-centered 'devotionalism' is not Bhakti, it > is called impersonalist (mayavadi) Sahajiya Tantrism. Ramakrishna was > not a sattvic Theistic Shaivite or a Vaishnava. > > Note that the Adherants site does not give a similar large number for > Tantric Kali worship as for Shaivism and Vaishnavism. The Adherants > web page charts (which pasted-in as lists in my previous mail) showed > the number of persons identified as Vaishnavas and Shaivites. These > hundreds of millions are people for whom God is Vishnu or Shiva. ALL > THESE PEOPLE WOULD BE CLASSED AND TRADITIONALLY SELF-IDENTIFIED AS ON > THE PATH OF BHAKTI YOGA. The Bhakti Yoga of these people can be > simple enough for a little child, or as challenging as the greatest > jnani wants it to be. The origin and basis of Bhakti is not our love > for God, but God's love for us. God has reached out to humanity with > a Self-revelation of Love, and pours-out His grace / love freely, > which can be received by anyone with an honest (humble) open heart. > There are no impediments to Bhakti except selfishness, impersonalism, > dishonesty, pride and a closed heart. > > It is actually appalling that any educated person would know so > little about the religions of India as to think that Ramakrishna was > representative of mainstream Bhakti Yoga ! Sadly this is the case > outside of India, and even among westerners who have gone there, but > just stayed in the myopic elitist little self-involved world of > Advaita Vedanta and Tantra. > > I was a member of the Executive Committee of the World Hindu > Organization under the Patronage of the Late King of Nepal. In this > capacity I met with governmental heads of state and the leaders of > Vaishnavism, Shaivism and other traditions. I actually discussed > religious demographics at length with government leaders in Nepal, > India and Sri Lanka. If you read my biography posted here, you should > know that I am currently the Interfaith Coordinator for the World > Vaishnava Association. I am recognised as an expert on the world > history of Bhakti Traditions and as a Master in one of the most > venerated lineages of Vaishnavism. I was given the Sannyasi name > BHAKTI Ananda because of my reputation as an 'adept' and a scholar of > Bhakti Yoga. These are some of my qualifications for speaking on > Bhakti Yoga in this forum.....and yet you continue to be arrogantly > dismissive of what I say, and argumentative just for the sake of > looking like an expert in front of your deluded followers. > > You made a preposterous statement and I corrected your misinformation > by posting here the statistics from the Adherants web site. Now you > are trying to dismiss what I have presented on the numbers of > Vaishnavas and Shaivites with another equally uninformed statement, > which is as outrageous and offensive as your last. > > I am sure that you are expert at some things, but you are misleading > people by presenting yourself as knowledgeable about Hinduism and > knowing very much of the various traditions and history of Buddhism > on this forum. The historical core of MAHAYANA Buddhism is PURE LAND > BUDDHISM. If you have no familiarity witheven the existance of Pure > Land Buddhism, then you are unqualified to teach any general course > on Buddhism. > > > > Christians, Muslims, Jews, and so on know nothing of Bhakti Yoga. > > YOU obviously know nothing about Bhakti Yoga as a path /pada, or > vehicle / vahaana, or Dharma Door / Dvara, or Yoga / yoke. Bhakti > Yoga is not something that you "... try to practice it for awhile, ". > > The goal of Bhakti Yoga is NOT about merging / 'union', as Advaitis > want to merge with the Brahman ! This is exactly NOT what any form of > traditional Bhakti Yoga is about. Such merging is a Sufi Advaiti, > Shaivite Tantric Advaiti, Kali Tantric Advaiti and Sahajiya goal. > Gnostics and 'Christian' practitioners of the extreme apophatic > tradition, like Meister Eckhart, and many New Agers have confused the > goal of such merging as some kind of Bhakti Yoga. There is no > authentic Bhakti Tradition in India where a soul-self wants to BE > their own lover / beloved or merge-into GOD. Merging is the anti- > thesis of Bhakti. > > > Mysticism, is union with God or even union with Godhead which is a > > more impersonal perspective of one's personal God. > > > Advaiti Impersonal Mysticism is. 'Nature' pantheistic mysticism is. > Godhead is only 'more impersonal' in the writings of such > impersonalists as Meister Eckhart. In authentic Bhakti Yoga, there is > no such 'more impersonal' Godhead. > > > Are you sugggesting that Theosophists should quit and become > Christians or Muslims? If you want me to worship a god, then maybe > you can tell me which one? And why should I chose one at the expense > of the others? I love them all. > > > Why would I want you to "worship a god..." ? I wish you to be fully > loved and to fully love, that is all. > > God is not the same as a god or gods. There is only one Supreme > Personality of Godhead, Who is infinite and has infinite > relationships with the beings that He has manifest and created. > Vaishnavas experience Him as Hari-Vasu-Atma To the Shaivites He has > revealed Himself as Hara / Shiva. To the Jews and Christians, He has > revealed Himself as Eli-Yahu-Adon and the Trinity. Do you really not > get that Godhead is ONE, but infinite and infinitely revealed? > > AND for those unable to establish a good relationship to GOD, there > is ESS / ISHISH / ISIS Shekinah / Shakti ! > > > > The Bhakti tradition, even when understood in the broad general > > terms of anyone who prays to a god, functions under the assumption > > of a personal self who seeks favors of a personal not-self. > > "seeks favors" ? This and the rest of your statements are all such > nonsense that I can only conclude that you have surrounded yourself > with people who know less that you, who have done you the disservice > of encouraging you to make pronouncements on subjects that you have > no grasp of. > > > Muslims, and most other religious folk would consider such a goal > > as blasphemy, and this is why I did not include the world's > > religions in the "Bhakti Tradition." Prayer and devotion and > > worship to God with the intent of ultimate union or at-one-ment is > > limited to only a small percentage of people. > > Again the at-one-ment of merging that you are describing is NOT > TRADITIONAL BHAKTI YOGA. IT IS ADVAITI. BHAKTI YOGA IS NOT ADVAITA > VEDANTA. > > I am an expert on Bhakti Yoga from its history to its living, and > what you have described is Advaiti impersonalism, the very opposite > of Bhakti Yoga. This Advaita Vedanta is a purely a Jnana Path. > > Instead of accepting the clear evidence I presented, of the largest > populations of devotees of GOD, including Catholics, Muslims, > Vaishnavas and Shaivites, you have presented an attempt to disguise > your great arrogant foolishness, by making yet another baseless > argument, that Christianity etc. is not a Bhakti Path. > > It is one thing to be wrong, but quite another to be proud and > incapable of correction. It is wrong to mislead people, and present > yourself as an expert when you are not. Anyone who encourages you in > this behavior is doing you a great disservice. > > Because I care about you and those your extremely wrong statements > have misled, I am posting these strong words. However because of the > prevailing attitude here, I doubt if they will do any good. > > Since it is apparently the Theosophical Society tradition to > completely reject any kind of actual real-world expert testimony in > favor of an unqualified Theosophist's opinion, I don't expect > anything of value to come out of posting anything else in this forum, > which is dominated by people like you, who cannot learn because you > already think you know it all. I am now unsubscribing from this list. > > Please stop misleading others with your proud misinformation. Your > prejudice against Monotheism and Bhakti Yoga will not make billions > of people go away. You may be able to mislead a few people here with > your disinformation, but like it or not, there are still billions of > people on the Bhakti Path. It is by all evidence the "Yuga Dharma". > > wishing you all well, > > Bhakti Ananda Goswami From dalval14@earthlink.net Sun Feb 02 02:24:43 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 10:24:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 65697 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 10:24:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m8.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 10:24:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.50) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 10:24:41 -0000 Received: from user-38ldmvq.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.219.250] helo=earthlink) by avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18fHIj-0001AE-00; Sun, 02 Feb 2003 02:24:37 -0800 To: "Theosophy Study List" Subject: RE: re "blinds," and TRUTH Dallas ... Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 02:19:41 -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 V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: From: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 February 2, 2003 Dear Mauri: As to truth. you have to decide on your own as to what is reasonably proved. No one can do more than submit evidence for you to judge on. Personally, I do not find "speculation" to be of much use. I prefer to use data that is available to all -- in that manner a greater consensus is usually achieved and the possibility of error is narrowed. I mean, if you are sincerely seeking for TRUTH . Here are some statements that have helped me: ---------------- Extracted from: H P B CAN THE MAHATMAS BE SELFISH [ H P B Articles I 321-3 ] ------- "The basis of knowledge exists everywhere, true knowledge consists in getting at the root of all phenomena, and thus arriving at a correct understanding of the primal cause, the "rootless root," which is not an effect in its turn. To perceive anything correctly, one can use only those senses or instruments which correspond to the nature of that object. Hence, to comprehend the noumenal, a noumenal sense is a pre-requisite; while the transient phenomena can be perceived by senses corresponding to the nature of those phenomena. Occult Philosophy teaches us that the seventh principle is the only eternal Reality, while the rest, belonging as they do to the "world of forms" which are non-permanent, are illusive in the sense that they are transient. it is only the seventh sense, which pertains to the noumenal world, that can comprehend the Abstract Reality underlying all phenomena. As this seventh principle is all-pervading, it exists potentially in all of us; and he, who would arrive at true knowledge, has to develop that sense in him, or rather he must remove those veils which obscure its manifestation. Selfishness is that feeling which seeks after the aggrandisement of one's own egotistic personality to the exclusion of others. If, therefore, selfishness limits one to narrow personalities, absolute knowledge is impossible so long as selfishness is not got rid of. So long, however, as we are in this world of phenomena, we cannot be entirely rid of a sense of personality, however exalted that feeling may be in the sense that no feeling of personal aggrandisement or ambition remains. We are, by our constitution and state of evolution, placed in the "World of Relativity," The MAHATMA is but an advanced occultist, who has so far controlled his lower "self" as to hold it more or less in complete subjection to the Cosmic impulse, it is in the nature of things impossible for him to act in any other but an unselfish manner. Those, who being still entangled in the web of the delusive sense of personality charge the MAHATMAS with "selfishness" in withholding "knowledge"--do not consider what they are talking about. The Law of Cosmic evolution is ever operating to achieve its purpose of ultimate unity and to carry the phenomenal into the noumenal plane, and the MAHATMAS, being en rapport with it, are assisting that purpose. They therefore know best what knowledge is best for mankind at a particular stage of its evolution, and none else is competent to judge of that matter, since they alone have got to the basic knowledge which can determine the right course and exercise proper discrimination. For us it will be evident that, as soon as the least feeling of selfishness tries to assert itself, the vision of the spiritual sense, becomes clouded and he loses the "power" which abstract "knowledge" alone can confer. Hence, the vigilant watch of the "Will" we have constantly to exercise to prevent our lower nature from coming up to the surface, which it does in our present undeveloped state; and thus extreme activity and not passivity is the essential condition with which the student has to commence. First his activity is directed to check the opposing influence of the "lower self"; and, when that is conquered, [Second] his untrammeled Will centered in his higher (real) "self," continues to work most efficaciously and actively in unison with the cosmic ideation in the "Divine Mind." ======================== Hope this proves to be of use, Dal ========================================= -----Original Message----- From: Mauri Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 2:17 PM To: Subject: re "blinds," and TRUTH Dallas ... Dallas wrote: <> "Agreed," in a sense, but I suspect that some people might prefer "speculating" with "truth," as well, and don't seem to want to just "grasp" it, apparently or possibly feeling that "truths" on this plane tend to be relative, dependent, dualistic and, as such, mayavic. Not that "relative" isn't often "OK" and "useful" and whatever ... But/"but"... Speculatively, Mauri From leonmaurer@aol.com Sun Feb 02 03:06:59 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: LeonMaurer@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 11:06:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 26231 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 11:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 11:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r03.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.99) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 11:06:57 -0000 Received: from LeonMaurer@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.bb.2d50e67f (3842) for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 06:06:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 06:06:52 EST Subject: Re: Theos-World yoga 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 28 From: leonmaurer@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=4099972 X-Yahoo-Profile: leonmaurer1 Etzion, Thank you for your clarification -- which I completely agree with. I also understand what you mean by "smell"... Since, I too have had the insight directly from the Master who showed me the "image" of all seven planes or fields of consciousness (one inside the other, inside the other, etc.) as seen from both the inside out and the outside in -- which are, in reality, all in the same place yet separated in space. This paradox I can "See" and "imagine" intuitively in Buddhi-Manas, but cannot describe in mundane words, except symbolically. In this vision (which is also surrounded and impregnated with smells, tastes, touches and sounds) -- the gaps between the planes or vibrational fields, like the missing or soundless notes in the musical scales, are only conceptions of the mind -- which are the last ones that have to be given up before making the final crossing. As the Master (through HPB in the SD) also points out, and as I've seen, there cannot be any gaps or empty spaces anywhere. (There can only be phase changes into different dimensions of space.) As, everything is motion, and the zero-points where motion starts and ends, and where consciousness and will dwells, are everywhere. Since I have "seen" this, I know that the gap between the 6th and seventh plane is both infinite, as you say, and also, infinitesimal, or zero -- depending on where you observe it from -- since everything is also relative, just as nothing is absolute, yet "exists" as such. I also know that there is no way to cross this gap without balancing both the bad and the good impressions or samskaras -- which are also conceptions of the mind -- and the last dregs of one's karma that has to be let go before making the final crossing of the imaginary, yet real, abyss. These final bad samskaras are "The Dweller on the Threshold" that we have to face and overcome before making that last crossing. This is simple, however, once one fully realizes that in order to be truly enlightened at the last crossing one must have total awareness of all the possible evil as well as all the good that one necessarily has experienced (but forgotten) through all previous incarnations -- thus re-experiencing the painful sufferings, and bearing on one's own head and in one's heart, the evil of the entire world -- which must be balanced with all its good. As you say, that is the difficult part. But, as I have seen -- since the gap is both infinite and finite, and all the samskaras are nothing but illusions or Maya -- once those sufferings are realized and balanced with the good, one must just let go of the last remaining images of the samskaras in the mind that we are grasping (thinking, as usual, wrongly, that because we think is why we exist :-). Once that has been done, we become so enlightened that we can make the leap with open arms, fly into the central fire or "spinergy," to return the spark to the flame or, allegorically, the drop to the ocean of theosophy or divine wisdom. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how we look at it) this last leap takes one out of the world and into the bliss of Nirvana for the remainder of the Manvantara. Therefore, once the samskaras have all been neutralized and karma harmonized, for those wishing to remain a Bodhisattva in order to help and teach others until all beings have reached the seventh plane, they must be ready to leap back and stay content to remain in the 5th & 6th planes, surrounded by the 7th as the Divine Monad. And, to reincarnate repeatedly until all beings are ready for the final crossing into Pralaya. Thus, I have been told and heard, shown and seen. May you reach your next terrace of enlightenment, LHM (Chaim) In a message dated 02/01/03 4:38:38 AM, etvionbb@netvision.net.il writes: I think what you say is basically true. The Truth is always within us, then, why don't we express it? Why all these horrible people on the planet commit daily horrendous crimes, where is the God being within themselves? Why Truth doesn't act through them? It is due to all these impression, age billions of years, which formed, as I call it, a *lead helmet* around the head, and prevents any fusion of the individual with Truth. It is true that an individual can attain Truth on his own, however, this will be very, very long, fraught with dangers, and most painful. And to top it all, it is not possible for anyone, to cross the last threshold unaided. I.e. crossing between the Six plane of consciousness and the Seventh plane. For one, the gap between these two planes is infinite, unlike the gap between the other planes, and that's why people can reach on their own a very exalted states, due to use of yoga technics, pure unselfish service for humanity etc, but they NEVER will be able to cross the last threshold on their own. Why? Because Perfection demands that the individual will be impressions-free. In order to wipe out impressions, you must create counter-impressions, which will be perfectly the opposite - they must be exactly in the same *shape*, and the same quantity. Now see the impossibility of the whole thing: good sanskaras (enslaving impressions), must to be wiped out as well. So, suppose a very saintly man enters the path, and he has, for the sake of our argument, only *good* sanskaras. It must be counteracted by *bad* sanskaras; how he is going to do this? I can tell you quite simply, that even a Six plane Master cannot help it. Now look at your personal case, you know about the Path, you learn all that you have learnt, due to the grace of the Masters: I have no doubt that true Masters backed Blavatsky, and I didn't study all this you are studying, I didn't read Isis Unveiled, and I didn't finish yet The Secret Doctrine, and I didn't read The Mahatma letters, and Blavatsky's letters. Why do I know this? It has a *smell*. I know it for myself. I wouldn't be here unless my Master wanted it. I see how my fellow Israeli Theosophists are being benefited. To serve a true Master is no mean achievement, trust me, it is a hair standing adventure, which demands taking spiritual responsibility, and willingness to undergo hardships cheerfully. And as an adage, we are only a burden on the Masters, they are not obliged to help us, we could have been ignored, and you would never assume what you truly say in your last paragraph below. Yours truly, Etzion ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 2:06 AM Subject: Re: Theos-World yoga > But, this "surrender" should not be misinterpreted. > > To be Human beings -- who are each, essentially, God incarnate -- is not > to be sheep, or like any other "animal" without a capability of Self > realization. > > To surrender to a self professed "living" or "dead" Master is a "vicarious > atonement" sidetrack that may pacify one, but does nothing more than delay > one's attainment of self mastery... Since a true Master says, "Do not follow > me, but follow the path I show you." This is the only true and independent > way to transcend ones karma, defuse the skandas, and attain true Freedom -- > requiring no kow towing, worship, or obedience to any personality, idol, > organization, or Gods... As theosophy teaches, only the TRUTH can make you > FREE. > > Therefore, there is only one "perfect Master" to surrender one's lower > self to... And, that is the Higher Self within each of us... Following all the > below rules of living that are essentially the "Heart doctrine" coupled with > the "Eye Doctrine"... Thus, combining ALL the yoga's and their goals into > ONE "self devised and self determined study and practice" -- that can suit > each individual's level of awareness and understanding when staring out, > independently, on the Path to eternal Freedom. > > LHM > From inquire@blavatskyarchives.com Sun Feb 02 09:09:29 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: inquire@blavatskyarchives.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 17:09:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 51293 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 17:09:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 17:09:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.70) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 17:09:29 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.251] by n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 02 Feb 2003 17:09:29 -0000 Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 17:09:28 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: "Esoteric and Science News" Site on the Hodgson Report Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 3104 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "Daniel H. Caldwell " X-Originating-IP: 169.197.10.233 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=136783012 X-Yahoo-Profile: danielhcaldwell The "Esoteric and Science News" site is now publishing parts of the 1885 Hodgson Report on Madame Blavatsky. An editorial comment on the site about the Hodgson Report reads: "Needless to say, this report, published in the Proceedings of the S. P R. in 1885, has always been the subject of scorn by Theosophists. For all their fulminations, though, it still stands on its own-the hyperemotionalism of their responses has left little room for substantive argument. In sixty pages, for instance, William Kingsland's Was She a Charlatan? manages to sandwich only one defensible point between his furious personal attacks on Hodgson's character." Quoted from: http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/rhreport.html These statements are misleading, to say the least. The comment about the Kingsland defense is apparently taken from Tim Maroney's critique of HPB. In reality, Kingsland makes many "defensible points." Interested readers should read and study Kingsland's critique. Let us now consider the following comment: "For all their fulminations, though, it still stands on its own-the hyperemotionalism of their responses has left little room for substantive argument." In fact, there are NUMEROUS "substantive arguments" against the Hodgson Report. One need only read and study the following works to see how baseless the above comment is. H. P. Blavatsky and The Society for Psychical Research by Grace F. Knoche http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/theos/th-sprgk.htm The Coulomb Conspiracy Against Theosophy by Charles J. Ryan http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-tm/hpbtm-13.htm Carrithers, Jr., Walter A. Obituary: The "Hodgson Report" on Madame Blavatsky http://blavatskyfoundation.org/obituary.htm Harrison, Vernon. H. P. Blavatsky and the SPR: An Examination of the Hodgson Report of 1885 http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-spr/hpbspr-h.htm There are other books (not online) which also deal with the Hodgson Report. See for example: Beatrice Hastings. Defence of Madame Blavatsky, Volume II, The "Coulomb Pamphlet, 1937 K. F. Vania. Madame H. P. Blavatsky: Her Occult Phenomena and The Society for Psychical Research, 1951. Furthermore, I have my own unpublished notes which show how misleading Richard Hodgson's statements are about Henry Olcott's testimony. Also one finds the following comment at the "Esoteric and Science News" website curious: "Because it has been suppressed by the TS for so many years, here then for the first time on the internet, the fourth authentic part of the Hodgson Report on Esoteric and Science News." The Report has been available from the London SPR and was even reprinted in the mid-1970s by Arno Press. How did the TS "suppress" the Hodgson Report? Daniel H. Caldwell Visit Blavatsky Archives at: http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm "...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at their right value; and unless a judge compares notes and hears both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision." H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218. From wry1111@earthlink.net Sun Feb 02 10:11:05 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: wry1111@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_4); 2 Feb 2003 18:11:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 29861 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2003 18:11:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Feb 2003 18:11:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Feb 2003 18:11:05 -0000 Received: from user-2ivfi3s.dialup.mindspring.com ([165.247.200.124] helo=idapingala) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18fOa5-0001tN-00 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 02 Feb 2003 10:11:02 -0800 Message-ID: <000901c2cae6$6a9a9680$7cc8f7a5@idapingala> To: References: Subject: Re: Theos-World Wry on Blavatsky part one Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 10:10:48 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 From: "wry" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=117031072 X-Yahoo-Profile: wry1111 Hi. To begin, your message is so ridiculous that at first I thought it was a joke, but, sadly, it is not. As I have stated in my message below, I do not believe this is the appropriate time on earth for any religion. Though I have taken a lot of Buddhist teachings, I personally do not chant or participate in rituals and I do not encourage anyone else to do so, so, technically, I am not a Buddhist as I am not supporting the established form of that religion. Your interpretation of my message below, is most simplistfic and even silly. I realize my message was not that specific. I was just giving my personal impressions and will try to be more specific in the future. When is that future. You will just have to wait and see. As I have said, I work very slowly, and have other stuff to do.This was in reply to your very own message which was of the similar ilk in that it was also non-specific in the very same way, and at the very least, my message provided a little contrast, of an equally non-specific nature. Actually, though, equally is not the right word, as I have expressed an important idea in my message, the difference between the well-formed construction of any major organically evolved and finely-tuned-over centuries religion and Madame Blavatsky's teaching. I am prepared to give examples of this in the future, but it is probably not even necessary, as anyone can go to any section of her writings and see what I am talking about, as she takes bits and pieces out of context and puts them together in such a way as to illustrate or show something else, but ONLY SO MUCH CAN BE CONVEYED THIS WAY, as there is no underlying structure that can be organicallly traced back to the whole in such a way that a person can relate it to his own physical functioning. (As above, so below). As far as a hidden agenda goes, as I have said, with me there is always a hidden agenda in the sense that I do not let the left hand know what the right hand is doing. Am I supposed to? There is also a folk saying, "Never show an unfinished project to a woman or a half-crazy man." (I did not make this up. Some guy actually told this to me once and said he heard it from his father. Communication is not just about words, but it is also about affect and flavor, as well as what is conveyed by the form of the written material or what, if anything is between the lines. If you do not like my work, just think of me as yet another ignorant person and feel compassion for me. I have actually making a lot of assumptions that many people are able to take the leap and see what I am suggesting about Madame Blavatsky, as to me it is so apparant, but perhaps I am idealizing the abilities of the "average" person on this list. I am not sure. I have had the problem of doing this in the past, and it is a flaw I am attempting to correct Sincerely, Wry. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 10:14 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World Wry on Blavatsky part one > Hi Wry, > > Pardon me if I appear to be blunt (although, I'll try to be polite :-) -- but > your statements and assertions below, which seem to have little basis in > facts, seem to me to be quite fallacious. And, also, appear as if you're > trying to convince us that you know something theosophists don't, because > they are following the wrong teacher. If so, does that mean you consider > yourself the "right great world teacher" now ready to take her place? I > wonder what AB and AAB, if they were still around, would say about that? :-) > > So, I also wonder if this isn't the first introduction to a hidden agenda > with the purpose of trying to organize theosophists into a new religion -- > using this forum as its focus -- with you as its high priestess? > > Hadn't AB already tried that -- and failed? Didn't AAB pick up AB's marbles > -- and turn her pseudo theosophy, and DK's phony "white magic" into a "New > Age" religion that attracts all the weak minded sheep who need a "leader" or > "prophet" to bolster their "blind belief"? Didn't this self professed > teacher further addle their minds with gobbledygook magic, and tell them they > can save the world by ritual group prayer, by welcoming living messiahs, and > accepting vicarious atonement's? Is that any different from all the other > organized priest crafty religions that already exist? Is that the kind of > new theosophical religion you want to introduce us to? Or, do you have a new > twist? > > So, in any event, what gives you the idea that theosophists need a new > religion in order to fullfill the three objects of the TM -- that they > already feel is all they can do to "save the world" (or become the helpers of > those who have a workable plan that might do so)? So, far no such "Master > Magician" has shown up, and I don't expect one ever will... (At least in this > forum. ;-) Are you that one? If so, what's the plan? Come up with a good > one, and I'll be the first to climb aboard. > > But if you can't, what makes you think you can do better than AB or AAB -- > especially, starting here, in an open forum where all the independent > theosophical free thinkers hang out -- and who *know* how false any > "organized religion" can be? Besides, what makes you assume that theosophy, > as presented by the Masters through the medium of HPB, has ever been > considered a "religion"? Why do you think the SD is subtitled, "A Synthesis > of Science, Religion and Philosophy"? In such a synthesis, which part of it > comes first? Which is more necessary to know or practice? Isn't it self > evident that they can't be separated? Or, do you have a different view of > theosophy than most serious students do? > > Haven't you studied the SD in depth (as it should be, for one who professes > to be a teacher of its "Secrets")? Haven't you read the Mahatma Letters? > Or, are you just making all this up -- your "special knowledge," your > connection with the same secret society as HPB, your new religion, etc. -- > out of your own head? Where and what is your "Truth"? I've read all your > letters to this and other forums, and as yet, while I know what you are > implying you know, I do not see any evidence that you actually know what you > are talking about. In fact, judging by your misjudgments of what theosophy > actually teaches, I'm not sure you know anything useful at all from a > theosophical, or even a scientific, philosophical or religious point of view. > If not, I wonder why you have chosen this forum as your platform? Is it, > that our contradictory arguments with each other and apparent separateness > (which really isn't the case, since some of us are mavericks who like > stirring pots to find out who's who and what's what ;-) makes us an easy > target for someone who want's to bring us together in what she feels is the > "proper" way to discuss and/or "practice" theosophy as a "religion"? > > Didn't HPB (and also, GB & JC) teach that we each have to practice our own > individual religion or yoga, to follow our own individual path of necessity, > and that we are each the only "leader" of our own personal "religion" -- with > our own higher Self as its only High Priest and "unbiased observer"? Didn't > JK say exactly the same thing after he broke away from AB's and CWL's so > called, "theosophical religion" (the LCC)? So, what makes you think JK > "broke away from HPB"? Wasn't it only that throwback, Christianized > religious distortion of theosophy that he split from? And, didn't he, from > then on, teach about traveling the same individual, self chosen "pathless > path" that HPB pointed out to all her disciples right from the beginning? > > Haven't you even read her instructions given to WQJ and RC, as well as to all > true theosophists in all her conversations and writings? How ignorant or > knowledgeable are you of the real teachings of theosophy (and it's sister > wisdom teachings of pure Hermetic occultism and alchemy)? What do you know > about what HPB taught in her esoteric section? Have you read and understood > her teachings in the "Transactions of the Blavatsky Lodge"? Don't you think > you should study all her writings, before spouting off about the character of > HPB, the wisdom of her teachings, or what the Theosophical Movement is all > about? > > Maybe, if we actually knew what you keep beating around the bush implying > that you know about theosophy and occultism -- some of us who really "know" > might be able to help you find your path, or your place here, (or even give > you a boost if you've already found it). But, wouldn't it be wise for you to > understand that your path is not necessarily our path? Reading between the > lines of HPB, who directly tells it as it is, whether symbolically or > metaphorically, is not the same thing as reading between your lines... That > appear to be nothing but word salads of vague implications and misdirected > criticisms slippery sliding all around the issues without any direct > transmission of useful information. > > Could it be, then, that its you who's the one "mixed up and immature"? If > HPB didn't know how to present the ancient knowledge and wisdom properly, why > don't you show us how she should have done it? Could it be that she's the > one who has brought us the modern "time relevant" teaching, and its you who > are sneakily and slyly trying to drag us back to a 12th century version of > organized religion and worship of Gods and rituals -- that theosophy > completely denies and deplores. > > So, maybe you should wake up, my fair lady, and start to either teach us > something worthwhile about theosophy we don't already know, give us a useful > yoga -- or tell us exactly what your hidden agenda is. So, far your intents, > while intentionally cloudy on the surface, are as transparent as glass to > some of us. My take is that you wish to capture the members of this forum as > your own private ashram or sangha -- with you as the Guru-ji. Well, go ahead > and try. It would be interesting to see whether or not you really can live > up to what you imply about your profound occult wisdom (that you always seem > to be ready to "talk about later" -- but never do). In the meantime, why > don't you back up what you do say and show us how outdated theosophy really > is? For starters, how about telling us where are its dogmas? What does it > teach or present wrong? > > So far, as I see it, and in spite of your unfounded opinions to the contrary > -- Theosophy is working just fine... Exactly the way the real Masters of the > Great Light Brotherhood wanted it to go. And, I'm certain that they and > their disciples and brothers (who are here watching you now ;-) would be > perfectly satisfied if each true theosophist *independently* follows the > three objects of the Theosophical Movement, thoroughly learns the Mysteries > of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis (and, thu