From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 01:23:18 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 76765 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 08:23:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 08:23:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepc.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.4) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 08:23:16 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 194B32629FF for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:23:16 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:18:45 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Daniel and all of you, My views are only views: I was searching a little and I got this page: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/on_shearman.html I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the Mahatma Letters to be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. That is just my conclusion. Feel free to agree or disagree...etc... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Caldwell" To: ".DanielHCaldwell" Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:16 AM Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > I've updated the following useful webpage: > > "Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources" > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/hpblinks.htm > > Feedback welcomed! > > Daniel H. Caldwell > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From dalval14@earthlink.net Tue Jul 01 03:10:55 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 71970 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 10:10:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 10:10:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.74) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 10:10:54 -0000 Received: from pool0070.cvx3-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.178.140.70] helo=earthlink) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XI62-00072u-00; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 03:10:47 -0700 To: , "AA-BN--Study" Subject: RE: [Blavatsky_Study] megalithic Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 03:12:11 -0700 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 V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <002201c33f20$01898940$a5138144@default> From: "dalval14" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tuesday, July 01, 2003 Dear G. and Friends: May I suggest: Look up Geoffrey HIGGINS, & Ignatius DONNELLY in ISIS UNVEILED INDEX Celtic Druids and their Remains S D II 343, 678fn, 740, 754, 756, 769, 791 The evidence is scattered all over the world. ------------------------------- Dracontia, Megaliths, standing stones, etc=85S D II 346-7, 380, 756, Megaliths S D II 342-4, 347, 352, Cyclopean structures and towns S D I 208-9fn, ; II 293-4, 335-347, 742-60, 769, Monuments S D I 208-9fn; II 222-3, 331, 343-5, 347, 352, 750, Oldest buildings are late Lemurian S D I 434-5; II 317, 343-4, 426, 429, 433fn, 769, Pyramids S D I 347fn, II 276fn, 352-3, 429, 462, 558, 575, LEMURIAN REMAINS Easter Island statues S D I 322, 439; 563; II 224, 233-5, 263, 316-7, 337, 327-8, 340, 557, 692, In Peru: S D II 35fn, 317, 337, 745 3 Eyed S D II 293-4, 299, 769, Circular stones Ireland S D II 343-4, 752, Giants S D II 171-2, 275-6, 289, 331, 337, 341, 424, 674, 753, 760, 777fn, Atlanteans S D I 208fn; II 20-1, 50, 67-8, 70, 293, 353, 407-8, 426, 429-31, 745-6, 753fn, 763fn, 767-8, Titans S D I 416-18, II 154, 236, 273-4, 293, 336, 381, 411, 422, 516, 775-7, Jotuns S D I 402; II 386 Rakshasas S D I 415; II 163, 165fn, 273-4, 314, 336, 347, 752, =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D One can spend a few interesting hours picking up clues on these. Best wishes, Dallas =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D -----Original Message----- From: Gregory Raymond [mailto:GPR7@peoplepc.com] Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 8:55 AM To: Blavatsky Study Subject: [Blavatsky_Study] megalithic Dal, Thanks for the great information..I'm still studying it..Good material..Lately I've been learning what Blavadsky had to say about an ancient religion called Draconcia and the megalithic structures in Europe..Greg Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Click Here! To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Blavatsky_Study-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mail@katinkahesselink.net Tue Jul 01 04:09:33 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 24112 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 11:09:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 11:09:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n13.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.68) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 11:09:33 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.115] by n13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jul 2003 11:09:32 -0000 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 11:09:29 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: theosophical humor Message-ID: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 575 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 all, Maybe it is a good idea to counteract some of the recent darkness with some wit. Not that I'm usually any good at humor, but here is a good one Joy Mills ones told: Two theosophist die, and find themselves on a road. So they walk happily along, untill they come to a fork in the road. They see a sign there. There is an arrow to the left which says: devachan, and an arrow to the right which says: lectures on devachan... No need to tell you all which road they took. --- I would love to hear some more jokes, spiritual or theosophical. Katinka Hesselink From dalval14@earthlink.net Tue Jul 01 04:12:53 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 19203 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 11:12:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 11:12:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.74) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 11:12:52 -0000 Received: from pool0033.cvx12-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.226.33] helo=earthlink) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XJ44-0003sh-00; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 04:12:48 -0700 To: "AA-BN--Study" , "Theosophy Study List" Subject: RE: to Dallas re PARAMATMAM -- ABSOLUTENESS Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 04:14:16 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: "dalval14" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Tuesday, July 01, 2003 RE: to Dallas re PARAMATMA -- ABSOLUTENESS Dear Jerry: I do understand you and your thesis. I sense however that it is most difficult to explain in our "lower-manasic" terms that which pertains to ATMA-BUDHI. Everything we sense is limited in dimensions as to time, space and motion relations. The transcendent or metaphysical, is not. The only relation we can grasp at (if I am correct) is infinite, impersonal, lawful and just, INTELLIGENT COMPASSION. A Monad which has reached this stage of cognizance sees both sides: the Manifested and the Non-manifested. He knows his SOURCES, and his limitations, and devotes his life to service of other Monads who are traversing the fields of experience. [Example: the GREAT SACRIFICE, S D I 207-8] Also there cannot be a "creator." That would invoke, sooner or later, the debasing idea of a "personal God." --and special favors to be obtained by sycophantic devotees, at the whim of an absolute TYRANT. Not a satisfactory picture of an "omnipresence, omniscience and omnipotence," I think. That also leads to the prevalent and many forms of religion, where truly ignorant "priests" mislead their flocks, and prevent, and discourage freedom of thought and research. Wisdom is GOD-LIKE KNOWLEDGE used generously and with compassion for the benefit of all who ask. Krishna, Budha, Jesus, and all other truly GREAT ONES invariably do this, but are widely unrecognized and their sacrifice is soon distorted and negated. Example: what kind of a civilization would we have now if the injunctions of Jesus (as an example) were truly used and rigorously applied by everyone? [ Most of us laugh at this and scoff, and call it impractical -- but, why ? What is so terrible, or so peculiarly funny and childishly naive about it? ] Karma, as endless and undefinable time, motion, and space, is like MAHA-VISHNU (Krishna) in the BHAGAVAD GITA It is always engaged in WISE ACTION. Hence, it pervades, sustains, emanates; but as a primal SOURCE, or CAUSE, it is inscrutable. And as Krishna is made to say by Valmiki: "I established this whole universe out of a portion of myself and remain separate" As you say: IT IS. OK ? Dallas ==================== -----Original Message----- From: G S Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 1:22 PM To: Subject: Re to Dallas <<>> Dallas, your reference to Blavatsky, while correct, is misapplied. She is talking about spirit and matter, both of which are within our 7-plane solar system, and both of which are mayavic and are conditionally real. The "one Absolute Spirit" is paramatman, and indeed it desires to define itself and its not-self, and it is this desire that leads to manifestation on the lower planes. But I have been talking about the 1 from the 0 in the sense of manifestation (which includes both spirit and matter) coming from Beness. My thesis is that it cannot do so. The manifested planes do not need a creator, because karma itself can produce an endless series of manvantaras. And Beness is outside of time, where t=0, and so cannot "do" anything at all except be (which is exactly why Blavatsky called it beness). Jerry S. From mail@katinkahesselink.net Tue Jul 01 04:51:18 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 384 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 11:51:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 11:51:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n4.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.88) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 11:51:18 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.168] by n4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jul 2003 11:51:18 -0000 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 11:51:16 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World direct insight (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00cd01c33e81$2c6621e0$052fa150@opasia.dk> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 5330 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 Morten, Sorry to say - you aren't going to influence my study habits. If what you write doesn't come across clearly, then I and everybody else has the right to ask questions and otherwise respond. If you first say one thing and then the exact opposite, it is no wonder I don't know what you are saying anymore... Some reply in between the below anyhow. Katinka --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" wrote: > Hi Katinka and all of you, > > My views are only views: > You do ask a lot. Allright then... > Your below email shows to me, that you did'nt quite digest > the email you responded to. That is my view. > You could consider this...on more than one level. - > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Katinka Hesselink" > > > So, in answer to 'what to do?', you should get used to > > > this idea. It is not the materials, the school, the individuals, or > > > anything else, which are confusing, making dissatisfied, or causing > > > uncertainty, but the clash between materials etc. and the > > > personality which feels itself threathened. > > > If you learn this, the difficulties disappear. This is because > > > the secondary peronsality learns that it is no longer in danger of > > > being punished or extinguished. > > Golly, is it that simple? > *** > Well - you know, that you will have to really - learn - it first - > do'nt you ! > *** > One insight and all my trouble with > > learning (say learning math) will disappear? Wow. Wish it were > > actually true. Even Krishnamurti (who was a great advocate of direct > > insight) did not go as far as you do above. > *** > No one said that all your trouble would disappear. Katinka: You literally wrote: "the difficulties dissapear". which sounds to me like the same thing as trouble disapears. then you deny anybody (lett alone you yourself) said that. weird. > But, that the mentioned > trouble will do so, - if you truely do learn and absorb the above. > A question arises... > Was Krishnamurti not against an occult Brotherhood ? > http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/truth_about_ k.html Katinka: As to that it is easiest to refer to "the inner life of Krishnamurti" by Aryal Sanat who has investigated this issue and comes to the following conclusion (from the backflap, hoping that word is English) "But Krishnamurti (K) was a revolutionary in the deepest sense. For over sixty years he publicly eschewed belief systems and presuppositions of any sort, including the esoteric principles taught by Theosophists. But privately? Aryel Sanat's ... meticulous research reveals that, contrary to appearances, K's inner life was rich in esoteric happenings. Privately, he never denied the existence of perennial "Masters"; nor did he deny being a vehicle for the manifestation of the Lord Maitreya, or the Christ. In fact, according to K, these inner realities were present every day of his natural life and intimately related to his work. " The point of denying it seems mainly to have been that people made it concrete, simplified, devoid of "the sacred" or something. And I can quite understand it. I mean, look up the word Maitreya on the internet and see what you come up with. I dare you to find one quote that is deep enough to deserve the title maitreya as its author. The same for masters and the term white brotherhood, if you exclude the many references to that in the theosophical literature. People have been anxious to label their truths with high sounding names, and that attitude started even before Krishnamurti was being raised by theosophists, I think. Not sure, a historical survey on the spread of this terminology might be interesting. Anyhow - people around Krishnamurti were more interested in the label and the status attached to it, than they were to the message. Those who remember some of the stuff being written about that time, will know that the whole circus around him was appalling. People weren't even told to rely on themselves to know which initiation to take. The whole atmosphere was very far removed from the atmosphere one gets from reading for instance Damodar, by Sven Eek. (early version of that book is online). Also, western society wasn't prepared for the flood of guru's that has been opened. I mean, by all acounts, in India it was well known that not every person personating a guru, was to be relied upon, also a tradition of doubt was in place, and people often went from guru to guru. This is accepted practice in the Buddhist system as well. Which simply means one learns what one can and judges the truth of it for oneself. But ultimately the message was identical to the message in Light on the Path: "For within you is the light of the world -- the only light that can be shed upon the Path. If you are unable to perceive it within you, it is useless to look for it elsewhere. " Anyhow, why worry about the labels. Why worry about whether or not Krishnamurti denied the masters. He either had something important to say, or he didn't. In my opinion he did. So did the Mahatmas. Even the story Cyril Scott gave here shows that Krishnamurti talked about an important truth (or more than one). So what's the issue? They disagreed on details... or did they? Katinka From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 05:15:52 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 33770 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 12:15:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 12:15:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepb.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.3) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 12:15:51 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 2F5095EE157 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:15:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <002701c33fc9$e1b640e0$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: Subject: Re: Theos-World direct insight (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:11:19 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Katinka and all of you, Thanks for your answer. This email seeks to anser on the "difficilties disappear" issue. Next email is intended to be on the Krishnamurti issue. My views are only views: I am really doing my best. I try again. The email we talk about was as I understand it, this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12435 In it we have that the below mentioned "difficulties" you refer to was the mentioned "confusion" in this following quote . This "confusion" does according to me not cover ALL kinds of difficulties - a student can have. That was what I meant. "To some readers the studying of Theosophy makes them uncertain to whether they should study at all. They sometimes find the psychological and spiritual studies confusing. They find that confusion makes it difficult for them to approach certain subjects, and once in them the confusion and dissatisfaction continues or gets worse. So you could ask, what to do ?" These were as I understand the text the difficulties, which should disappear. I would like to know if I am wrong. In the below I ca'nt find last sentence in the following quote, which you somehow have deleted from the original emailed answer to you: "No one said that all your trouble would disappear. But, that the mentioned trouble will do so, - if you truely do learn and absorb the above." The answer was this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/12465 Here you can read the deleted sentence. This sentence gives my answer a different reading i believe. But I do care. Feel free to comment or do your best... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Katinka Hesselink" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:51 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World direct insight (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood) > Hi Morten, > > Sorry to say - you aren't going to influence my study habits. > If what you write doesn't come across clearly, then I and everybody > else has the right to ask questions and otherwise respond. If you > first say one thing and then the exact opposite, it is no wonder I > don't know what you are saying anymore... Some reply in between the > below anyhow. > > Katinka > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" theosophy@a...> wrote: > > Hi Katinka and all of you, > > > > My views are only views: > > You do ask a lot. Allright then... > > Your below email shows to me, that you did'nt quite digest > > the email you responded to. That is my view. > > You could consider this...on more than one level. > - > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Katinka Hesselink" > > > > So, in answer to 'what to do?', you should get used to > > > > this idea. It is not the materials, the school, the > individuals, or > > > > anything else, which are confusing, making dissatisfied, or > causing > > > > uncertainty, but the clash between materials etc. and the > > > > personality which feels itself threathened. > > > > If you learn this, the difficulties disappear. This is because > > > > the secondary peronsality learns that it is no longer in danger > of > > > > being punished or extinguished. > > > Golly, is it that simple? > > *** > > Well - you know, that you will have to really - learn - it first - > > do'nt you ! > > *** > > One insight and all my trouble with > > > learning (say learning math) will disappear? Wow. Wish it were > > > actually true. Even Krishnamurti (who was a great advocate of > direct > > > insight) did not go as far as you do above. > > *** > > No one said that all your trouble would disappear. > Katinka: > You literally wrote: "the difficulties dissapear". which sounds to me > like the same thing as trouble disapears. then you deny anybody (lett > alone you yourself) said that. weird. > > But, that the mentioned > > trouble will do so, - if you truely do learn and absorb the above. > > A question arises... > > Was Krishnamurti not against an occult Brotherhood ? > > > http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/truth_about_ > k.html > Katinka: > As to that it is easiest to refer to "the inner life of Krishnamurti" > by Aryal Sanat who has investigated this issue and comes to the > following conclusion (from the backflap, hoping that word is English) > "But Krishnamurti (K) was a revolutionary in the deepest sense. For > over sixty years he publicly eschewed belief systems and > presuppositions of any sort, including the esoteric principles taught > by Theosophists. > But privately? > Aryel Sanat's ... meticulous research reveals that, contrary to > appearances, K's inner life was rich in esoteric happenings. > Privately, he never denied the existence of perennial "Masters"; nor > did he deny being a vehicle for the manifestation of the Lord > Maitreya, or the Christ. In fact, according to K, these inner > realities were present every day of his natural life and intimately > related to his work. " > > The point of denying it seems mainly to have been that people made it > concrete, simplified, devoid of "the sacred" or something. And I can > quite understand it. I mean, look up the word Maitreya on the > internet and see what you come up with. I dare you to find one quote > that is deep enough to deserve the title maitreya as its author. The > same for masters and the term white brotherhood, if you exclude the > many references to that in the theosophical literature. People have > been anxious to label their truths with high sounding names, and that > attitude started even before Krishnamurti was being raised by > theosophists, I think. Not sure, a historical survey on the spread of > this terminology might be interesting. Anyhow - people around > Krishnamurti were more interested in the label and the status > attached to it, than they were to the message. Those who remember > some of the stuff being written about that time, will know that the > whole circus around him was appalling. People weren't even told to > rely on themselves to know which initiation to take. The whole > atmosphere was very far removed from the atmosphere one gets from > reading for instance Damodar, by Sven Eek. (early version of that > book is online). > > Also, western society wasn't prepared for the flood of guru's that > has been opened. I mean, by all acounts, in India it was well known > that not every person personating a guru, was to be relied upon, also > a tradition of doubt was in place, and people often went from guru to > guru. This is accepted practice in the Buddhist system as well. Which > simply means one learns what one can and judges the truth of it for > oneself. But ultimately the message was identical to the message in > Light on the Path: > "For within you is the light of the world -- the only light that can > be shed upon the Path. If you are unable to perceive it within you, > it is useless to look for it elsewhere. " > > Anyhow, why worry about the labels. Why worry about whether or not > Krishnamurti denied the masters. He either had something important to > say, or he didn't. In my opinion he did. So did the Mahatmas. Even > the story Cyril Scott gave here shows that Krishnamurti talked about > an important truth (or more than one). So what's the issue? They > disagreed on details... or did they? > Katinka > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From mail@katinkahesselink.net Tue Jul 01 05:40:48 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 89020 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 12:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 12:40:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n29.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.85) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 12:40:46 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.189] by n29.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jul 2003 12:39:59 -0000 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 12:39:58 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Re: wisdom : Theory and Practice 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: 5998 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 Dallas, I have only one very short answer to that one. Which facts and thoughts are you ignoring while being so loyal to Blavatsky and the Mahatmas? -- And now for a longer elaboration of where that question is coming from: I found out just how this process works while looking again at the Bowen Notes I wrote about a few weeks ago, how there is doubt whether they report an actual conversation with Blavatsky. So I looked the notes up and reviewed what I found and came up with quite a few things that I had previously simply ignored - keeping aloof, because HPB "probably had a point". With all due respect to HPB, I don't think putting the products of her mind a century ago, over my alive mind now, is helpfull. I mean, if there were a live HPB sitting here in my study, it would be different, but even then I hope I would be honest enough to ask the questions, voice my doubts etc. What use is silently and demurely saying aye and amen to her words? Bowen notes plus footnotes found at: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/metaphys/th-bowen.htm Now whether or not HPB aproved of the Bowen Notes isn't relevant to the present subject. What is relevant is that ultimately I have to decide for myself what I consider true. I can't keep my mind on the leash of those who supposedly knew better than me. (even if their track record of cooking is very good). I've had enough experience of science (for instance) saying one thing for years, when my instincts said something else - and then finding that years later science changed her mind, and my opinion is suddenly science based - to know that to trust anything other than my own instincts (where they have an opinion) is folly. Though this comes with the reservation that continuous self-observation is necessary in order to keep track of self-delusion. The above doesn't mean, by the way, that I am claiming to have The Truth in the palm of my hand. I certainly don't. All it means is that I don't think any of us should trust any authority, H.P. Blavatsky or anybody else, beyond what their own instincts confirm. And where ethics and self-study are concerned: I agree with Dallas, Blavatsky and the Mahatmas have written wonderful stuff. But where things like Atlantis, Lemuria and the race theories are concerned, things get very hazy. Fortunatly that stuff is hardly going to change our lives, whether true or untrue or largely veiled. Katinka --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "dalval14" wrote: > Sunday, June 29, 2003 > > Dear Friend, > > I have looked at the quotations (also familiar to me) you have > provided from the MAHATMA LETTERS > > > ">> (1) An adept - the highest as the lowest - is one only during > the > exercise of his occult powers.>> [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , p. > 180] > > and > > >> When the inner man rests the adept becomes an ordinary man, > limited to his physical senses and the functions of his physical > brain. Habit sharpens the intuition of the latter, yet is unable > to > make them supersensuous. The inner adept is ever ready, ever on > the > alert, and that suffices for our purposes. At moments of rest > then, > his faculties are at rest also. >> [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , > p. 180] > > and > > >>Couple this with the unpleasant fact that we are forbidden to > use > one particle of our powers in connexion with the Eclectics >> > [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , p. 181] > > From letter 24b (old order) or 85b chronological. > Copied from the CD-ROM." > > Your conclusions read: > > "If that is so, then they are likely to be at fault, in the case > of details. And unfortunately, what we consider important, or > mere detail, is likely to be different from what they considered > important or detail. > > In short: the material provided by Mahatmas and Blavatsky is in > the same position as every other piece of food put before us by a > good cook: edible and useful until proven to be unhealthy or > spoilt. And where different spiritual teachers agree - they are > more likely to have gotten it right. So that I would say - we > should sample different spiritual teachings in order to be able > to judge correctly." > > My view is that > > First: I am not competent to decide, using by brain-mind, what H > P B sand Mahatmas write and teach is incorrect. > > I would consider that presumptuous in view of the fact that all I > have so far studied is coherent and dovetails into a whole. > There are many statements that I have not understood. I set > those aside for continual future consideration. In most cases I > have found later corroboration I do not conclude swiftly that > "They" are wrong or "inaccurately written." My knowledge is far > less comprehensive than Theirs. So I am willing to study further > to find out if there is something I had missed. > > Second: I can exercise my free will to check for logic, > potential truth, reasonableness and "common sense" all statements > made, but that does not entitle me to decide on their accuracy, > nor to tell others that I think I have found errors, nor further, > try to CHANGE those teachings to suit my petty conclusions. > > Third: I am unwilling to say that they are WRONG in any detail, > especially as the Master writes that he had thoroughly reviewed, > corrected and annotated The SECRET DOCTRINE. That stands for > something. > > Theosophy may not please all. At best, as their pupils, we can > but bow and say we will try to learn. If, however we consider we > are not their pupils, then, I suppose that appears to free us to > say anything, whether fully reasoned or not. > > However I, being very cautious in all such matter, start with > asking questions and not stating opinions. > > But I also recognize others' right and freedom to adopt any > attitude they please. > > Personally, I have too much respect for these great Personages, > and would be glad it they accepted me as their lowest pupil. > > Best wishes, > > Dallas From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 05:55:01 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 22457 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 12:54:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 12:54:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepb.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.3) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 12:54:55 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepb.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 6053C5EE151 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:54:54 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <003401c33fcf$570a9f80$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: Subject: Re: Theos-World direct insight (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:50:23 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Katinka and all of you, Again thanks for your kind answer. This answer is on the Krishnamurti issue. My previous answer was on the "difficulties disappear issue". My views are only views: I do not think that we talk about details in disagreement. It is more than that. One can disagree - and care at the same time... The short conclusion I get is: So publicly Krishnamurti denied the existence of the Masters and the Path. And privately he is - assumed ? or known ? - to have agreed to the opposite view ? Is this your view and others view ? So i ask, what do you think about this the following part of the text taken from the same link http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/truth_about_k.html . Is it true ?: ***Quote begins*** "Then are we to assume," I hazarded, "that Krishnamurti's mission has been a complete failure!" "Friend," said the old gentleman, "you ask many questions, to what use will you put the answers if we give them to you?" It was on the tip of my tongue to apologize, but instead I felt impelled to speak what was in my mind. "Sir Thomas," I replied, "because of Krishnamurti, many people are in great distress; if you'll be gracious enough to enlighten me a little, perhaps I may be able to enlighten them." "Good!" he exclaimed, "the motive is pure; your questions will be answered." I began to express my gratitude, but he waved it aside with a kindly gesture, and proceeded: "He who attempts to teach Advaita, and omits all Sanscrit terms, courts failure. Sanscrit words engender an occult vibration 138 which is lost when translated. Western words not suitable to describe subjective states of consciousness, because their associations are mainly mundane." He paused a moment to continue his lunch, then added: "Well did my Brother Koot Hoomi say that Krishnamurti had destroyed all the many stairways to God, while his own remains incomplete." "And would never be suitable for all types, in any case," J.M.H. put in. "Also, being incomplete," the old gentleman took up the thread again, "it may lead to dangers unforseen by those who attempt to climb it. Danger Number One: Krishnamurti's casting aside of time-honoured definitions and classifications leaves aspirant without true scale of values. Danger Number Two: climbing his particular staircase necessitates constant meditation, which in its turn necessitates constant protection from Guru--and Guru not allowed by Krishnamurti." he concluded with a twinkle. "But" I asked, "is the Guru's protection always necessary for meditation--I mean even when its done in small doses?" "0f course, a moderate degree may be practiced in safety without a Guru." J. M. H. 139 replied, "but as Sir Thomas says, long continued meditation leads to states of consciousness and excursions on to other planes where the Master's guidance is absolutely indispensable. Another flaw in this pseudo Advaita which Krishnamurti is giving out, is that he addresses the personality, the physical-plane man, as if he were the Monad or at least the Ego. Of course the Monad, the divine Spark, is the Absolute Existence-Knowledge-Bliss, and hence eternally free, but that doesn't mean that the personality down here, immersed in endless-seeming karmic difficulties, can share its consciousness, or even that of the Ego--the link between the personality and the Monad. Krishnamurti's Advaitism, which is not to be confounded with the recognized form of that noble philosophy, will, I fear, lead his followers nowhere except perhaps to hypocrisy and self-delusion." Sir Thomas nodded assent." And while he has directed them to repudiate all Masters, he refuses to act as Guru to them himself." The old gentleman was silent for a moment, then shook his head mournfully. "Children crying in the night of spiritual darkness, and 140 no one to comfort them. ... He who could help, won't, and we who might help, can't, for Doubt has poisoned their belief in our very existence. No wonder Koot Hoomi's face looks a little sad." He turned to the large dog which, all this while, with remarkable canine self-control, had sat perfectly still, gazing up at him; and as he patted him, he said. "My friend, if even the King told you your master were superfluous, I don't think you'd believe him, eh!" The dog wagged his tail, and touchingly snuggled up against Sir Thomas's knee." ***Quote ends*** A question more: So did Krishnamurti cut himself of from the White Lodge - or did he not ? I ask because i know, that some of the readers have studied the Krishnamurti "path" a whole lot. And I ask because I do care... Let us remember, that the above quoted text was written years ago. My view: The masters exist. But they are not Masters as people often think about them. The Path towards enlightement exists, but it is not any ordinary Path for sure. The Path is even mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita...(- smile). The need for a teacher is important to most students in the western world. Krishnamurti did some good work when he became older. But his work around the years 1929-1938 was not so good. Feel free to comment or do your best... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Katinka Hesselink" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:51 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World direct insight (krishnamurti and the white brotherhood) > Hi Morten, > > Sorry to say - you aren't going to influence my study habits. > If what you write doesn't come across clearly, then I and everybody > else has the right to ask questions and otherwise respond. If you > first say one thing and then the exact opposite, it is no wonder I > don't know what you are saying anymore... Some reply in between the > below anyhow. > > Katinka > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" theosophy@a...> wrote: > > Hi Katinka and all of you, > > > > My views are only views: > > You do ask a lot. Allright then... > > Your below email shows to me, that you did'nt quite digest > > the email you responded to. That is my view. > > You could consider this...on more than one level. > - > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Katinka Hesselink" > > > > So, in answer to 'what to do?', you should get used to > > > > this idea. It is not the materials, the school, the > individuals, or > > > > anything else, which are confusing, making dissatisfied, or > causing > > > > uncertainty, but the clash between materials etc. and the > > > > personality which feels itself threathened. > > > > If you learn this, the difficulties disappear. This is because > > > > the secondary peronsality learns that it is no longer in danger > of > > > > being punished or extinguished. > > > Golly, is it that simple? > > *** > > Well - you know, that you will have to really - learn - it first - > > do'nt you ! > > *** > > One insight and all my trouble with > > > learning (say learning math) will disappear? Wow. Wish it were > > > actually true. Even Krishnamurti (who was a great advocate of > direct > > > insight) did not go as far as you do above. > > *** > > No one said that all your trouble would disappear. > Katinka: > You literally wrote: "the difficulties dissapear". which sounds to me > like the same thing as trouble disapears. then you deny anybody (lett > alone you yourself) said that. weird. > > But, that the mentioned > > trouble will do so, - if you truely do learn and absorb the above. > > A question arises... > > Was Krishnamurti not against an occult Brotherhood ? > > > http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/truth_about_ > k.html > Katinka: > As to that it is easiest to refer to "the inner life of Krishnamurti" > by Aryal Sanat who has investigated this issue and comes to the > following conclusion (from the backflap, hoping that word is English) > "But Krishnamurti (K) was a revolutionary in the deepest sense. For > over sixty years he publicly eschewed belief systems and > presuppositions of any sort, including the esoteric principles taught > by Theosophists. > But privately? > Aryel Sanat's ... meticulous research reveals that, contrary to > appearances, K's inner life was rich in esoteric happenings. > Privately, he never denied the existence of perennial "Masters"; nor > did he deny being a vehicle for the manifestation of the Lord > Maitreya, or the Christ. In fact, according to K, these inner > realities were present every day of his natural life and intimately > related to his work. " > > The point of denying it seems mainly to have been that people made it > concrete, simplified, devoid of "the sacred" or something. And I can > quite understand it. I mean, look up the word Maitreya on the > internet and see what you come up with. I dare you to find one quote > that is deep enough to deserve the title maitreya as its author. The > same for masters and the term white brotherhood, if you exclude the > many references to that in the theosophical literature. People have > been anxious to label their truths with high sounding names, and that > attitude started even before Krishnamurti was being raised by > theosophists, I think. Not sure, a historical survey on the spread of > this terminology might be interesting. Anyhow - people around > Krishnamurti were more interested in the label and the status > attached to it, than they were to the message. Those who remember > some of the stuff being written about that time, will know that the > whole circus around him was appalling. People weren't even told to > rely on themselves to know which initiation to take. The whole > atmosphere was very far removed from the atmosphere one gets from > reading for instance Damodar, by Sven Eek. (early version of that > book is online). > > Also, western society wasn't prepared for the flood of guru's that > has been opened. I mean, by all acounts, in India it was well known > that not every person personating a guru, was to be relied upon, also > a tradition of doubt was in place, and people often went from guru to > guru. This is accepted practice in the Buddhist system as well. Which > simply means one learns what one can and judges the truth of it for > oneself. But ultimately the message was identical to the message in > Light on the Path: > "For within you is the light of the world -- the only light that can > be shed upon the Path. If you are unable to perceive it within you, > it is useless to look for it elsewhere. " > > Anyhow, why worry about the labels. Why worry about whether or not > Krishnamurti denied the masters. He either had something important to > say, or he didn't. In my opinion he did. So did the Mahatmas. Even > the story Cyril Scott gave here shows that Krishnamurti talked about > an important truth (or more than one). So what's the issue? They > disagreed on details... or did they? > Katinka > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From mhart@idirect.ca Tue Jul 01 06:06:42 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mhart@idirect.ca X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 36608 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 13:06:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 13:06:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gatekeeper.look.ca) (207.136.80.8) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 13:06:23 -0000 Received: from on-osh-ap3-04-28.look.ca ([216.154.45.171] helo=idirect.ca) by gatekeeper.look.ca with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19XKpx-0000a8-2s for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 13:06:21 +0000 Message-ID: <3F018A3B.CDE873EB@idirect.ca> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:18:51 -0400 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "theos-talk@yahoogroups.com" X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mhart@idirect.ca Subject: re "theosophical humor" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=6.5 tests=USER_AGENT_MOZILLA_XM,X_ACCEPT_LANG version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) X-SA-Exim-Version: 3.0 (built Mon Jun 2 17:21:47 GMT 2003) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes From: Mauri X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=60894584 X-Yahoo-Profile: sunzenn Katinka wrote: <> Yeah, except that if thought they went to the lectures, they really went to lectures in Devanchan, (seeing as at that stage of the game their options must've been rather essentially limited, realistically speaking, eh?), so they must've been a couple of naive Theosophists, basically, I tend to suspect ... hardy har har. Speculatively, Mauri From PhilotesII@aol.com Tue Jul 01 07:06:59 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: PhilotesII@aol.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 6329 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 14:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 14:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d05.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.37) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 14:06:58 -0000 Received: from PhilotesII@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36_r1.1.) id r.24.41ad7492 (4312) for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <24.41ad7492.2c32ef74@aol.com> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:06:44 EDT Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 7.0 for Windows sub 10500 From: PhilotesII@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=150072488 X-Yahoo-Profile: philotesii Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 01-Jul-03 1:17:54 AM GMT Daylight Time, danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com writes: > Feedback welcomed! > Wow, it is an excellent list of resources. Thank you very much. PhilotesII [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From samblo@cs.com Tue Jul 01 07:49:31 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: Samblo@cs.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 40561 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 14:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 14:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d03.mx.aol.com) (205.188.157.35) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 14:49:29 -0000 Received: from Samblo@cs.com by imo-d03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v36_r1.1.) id r.144.148babbb (14374) for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:49:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <144.148babbb.2c32f96c@cs.com> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:49:16 EDT Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: [Blavatsky_Study] megalithic To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: CompuServe 2000 32-bit sub 107 From: samblo@cs.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=27151446 Dallas, Thanks, your referencing of the "Celtic Druids" warms my heart. I used to have a copy of the work. It is a very nice work with many hand scribed pictures of the main remaining sites such as Stonehenge made when there was less destructive traffic of the many sites. Higgins was quite prolithic in his survey. It is currently in republishment by Health Research: Health Research Box 850 Pomeroy, Wa., 99347 1-888-844-2386 Website:www.healthresearchbooks.com Higgins "Anacalypsis" is also available from them and Madame Blavastky used it as a reference. John From mail@katinkahesselink.net Tue Jul 01 10:37:10 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: mail@katinkahesselink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 22512 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 17:37:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 17:37:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n11.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.66) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 17:37:09 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.113] by n11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Jul 2003 17:37:05 -0000 Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:37:05 -0000 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: as bad as Bart put it ??? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <00bf01c33e79$7dd23940$052fa150@opasia.dk> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1327 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 --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" wrote: > And my relation to Bart, or at least one relation, - is - that Bart > has to learn > stop being - so - rude. > Bart has his mission and agenda. Much will be revealed about that > if one reads most of Barts emails made here at Theos-Talk. Hi Morten, Having been online with Bart on some of the same e-mail lists for years and years and years, (almost as long as I've been active on e- mailgroups at all), I think I can tell you that there isn't much more than meets the eye in Bart, in the sense that I don't think there is any ulterior motive. He thinks he sees a wrong and tries to correct it. That is all - now maybe his way of presenting himself might be polished, but then, the same might be said of you. I don't think I would be wrong in saying that you are both equally devoted to your respective branches of theosophy, but you happen to have quite different interpretations of how to go about it. It is always easier to spot the beam in somebody elses eye and on top of that, to imagine some evil purpose behind the beam. We would all (including myself I suspect) make our lives a lot easier if we stopped guessing at peoples motives (especially online) and restricted our feedback to people's actions. Katinka From wry1111@earthlink.net Tue Jul 01 10:39:35 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: wry1111@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 18404 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 17:39:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 17:39:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.74) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 17:39:34 -0000 Received: from user-38ldurt.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.251.125] helo=idapingala) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XP6L-0007WX-00 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 10:39:34 -0700 Message-ID: <004101c33ff7$63307d20$7dfb56d1@idapingala> To: References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:37:03 -0700 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. This is not a response to you in particular, Morton, but a general comment on this subject. If we look back too much and in the wrong way, we will turn into pillars of salt, as in the story of Sodom and Gommorah. There is no way to balance things by doing this, and the imbalance leads to more analysis and a further attachment to material. It is a maze and there is no way out. It has nothing to do with me and my opinions whether this is true or not. It is a law in that a certain approach can only lead to a certain kind and quality of result. Moreover, re the Madame Blavatsky's material including the letters of the Mahatmas, whether they be real or fake, being time-appropriate. It is most interesting that I have had to present this idea to anyone who is an educated theosophist and that this idea originally encountered so much resistance (though this seems to be gradually changing) and that so much hostility was expressed toward me for doing so, as this is so obvious and any good scholar of this kind of material could see it at first glance. Moreover, it is my opinion that until this idea is understood and accepted, things will be log jammed to a very large extent and people will miss the opportunity to use what is appropriate for this time and age from Madame Blavatsky's teachings and apply it to the formation of a univeral brotherhood. To put it gently, there is a good chance that the Blavatsky material has lost a lot of its baraka. This is not good or bad, in that it always happens and is to be expected, but unless this is accounted for, there is going to be a lot of wasted effort and a continued pouring from the empty into the void. What is baraka and how is it created? I believe this has something to do with a conscious aim in relationship to the physical substances that are created and emanated from a certain individual or individuals as a result of the making of a conscious effort to realize this aim. It is a most interesting subject and Morton does seem to be pointing us in the direction of exploring this. For now, maybe it is at least something to ponder about. Sincerely, Wry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:18 AM Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > Hi Daniel and all of you, > > My views are only views: > > I was searching a little and I got this page: > http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/on_shearman.html > > I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the > Mahatma Letters to > be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. > > That is just my conclusion. > > Feel free to agree or disagree...etc... > > > from > M. Sufilight with peace and love... > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Caldwell" > To: ".DanielHCaldwell" > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:16 AM > Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > I've updated the following useful webpage: > > > > "Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources" > > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/hpblinks.htm > > > > Feedback welcomed! > > > > Daniel H. Caldwell > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From compiler@wisdomworld.org Tue Jul 01 11:59:58 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: compiler@wisdomworld.org X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 47887 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 18:59:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 18:59:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ams005.ftl.affinity.com) (216.219.253.200) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 18:59:57 -0000 Received: from wisdomworld.org ([68.32.55.36]) by ams.ftl.affinity.com with ESMTP id <215096-30941>; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 14:58:40 -0400 Message-ID: <3F01E7AC.754061B5@wisdomworld.org> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 14:57:32 -0500 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 (Macintosh; I; PPC) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: A "Youth Forum" Q&A article about "TRAGEDY" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Compiler X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=46028585 X-Yahoo-Profile: john_compiler_wisdomworld I hope that many readers, especially newcomers to theosophy, will find this article about "TRAGEDY" in the "Youth Forum" question & answer department of THEOSOPHY magazine, which is found in the "Additional" articles Index page of my WisdomWorld.org web site, to be very informative and useful; and that it may be the type of article that spurs some people to think of things to respond with -- either by commenting on some of the subjects and things in it, or by talking about the subjects in different ways, or by asking questions, or by providing answers to those that may be asked. This is the question about "tragedy" that is answered in article Number 21 of the 21 that are so far finished in the department (and the direct link to it): ======================================================= (21) July 1964 [This Question is answered: Horace Walpole once remarked, "This world is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel." This epigram, though probably correct in its implication that tragedy is as much a view of life as a literary form, seems nevertheless a great oversimplification of the nature of literary tragedy, since it indicates that anyone who "feels," and who has talent, could write one. Many writers and critics think otherwise, however, declaring that a tragedy could not possibly be written today in our complex and compromised world; our view of life is too secular and too muddled to permit it. What view of life, then, would allow for tragic expression? Is it conceivable that a Theosophist could write a tragedy?] http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/YouthForum/21.html ======================================================== And Below is the link to the section on the "Additional" articles Index page that is entitled "NINE GROUPINGS OF ARTICLES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE & ADULTS-- MOST OF WHICH ARE IN "QUESTION & ANSWER" FORMAT that the "Youth Forum" department is in. It's the 13th of 18 sections on the page. These are the nine departments. The link to the Index page of the "Youth Forum" department is the 5th one: (1) Theosophy School (1925-26) (2) Youth-Companions' Forum (1930-41) (3) Youth-Companions Ask-- (1947-51) (4) Youth-Companions Ask--and Answer (1951-62) (5) Youth Forum (1962-67) (6) Student Reflections (1996-98) (7) Question--and Comment (1960-62) (8) Letters-Questions-Comment (1962-98) (9) Facets of Inquiry (since 1999) The link to the 13th section: http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/index.html#13 =================================================== Dear newcomers to Theosophy: I sincerely do hope that my web site offers a well-rounded overall view of Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement. The 3 main links to everything on it are found below. Please know that I'm only the compiler of all the articles found on my web site; I'm not a scholar; and also that I personally do not like to take part in conversations, even though I do hope that what I present from time to time will help a little in the discussions being carried on by others. So please do not be insulted when I do not respond if someone addresses me, or addresses anything that is found in any of the articles on my web site; I leave that for others to deal with if they want to -- whether pro, con, neutral, friendly or unfriendly. John DeSantis (Compiler) ------- You may find a great deal of the Truth that you are searching for here: WisdomWorld.org web site (Main Page): http://www.wisdomworld.org This is the Index page of the "Introductory", "Setting the Stage" book, which was especially compiled for newcomers to Theosophy: http://www.wisdomworld.org/setting.html The page where "Additional" articles are slowly being added (which contains 18 sections that can each be clicked on at the top of the page in order to go directly down to them, as well as to get the link to any particular section that you may want to use in a posting on a discussion board, or in an e-mail to someone): http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/index.html "PUBLIC & PRIVATE ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT FORUM": This next link is to the most updated version of my economic proposal to humanity, a practical project to help our suffering world that I also consider to be Theosophical. In it you will find a new and unique, but mostly unknown, economic system model that might be able to put an end to involuntary poverty on earth. How? It presents a way to fully finance everything of importance that is needed in every nation. Because of this it's well worth pointing to. Please note that, for strategic reasons, of wanting it to have the best chance of being accepted by all peoples worldwide, no matter what their religious, philosophical, and scientific beliefs are, I've put it on a completely different web site; it contains no mention of, or link to, the Theosophy and the Theosophical Movement that is presented on my WisdomWorld.org web site: http://www.PublicAndPrivateEnterprise.org ------- From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 12:11:29 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 66996 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 19:11:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 19:11:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepc.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.4) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 19:11:27 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A884262A06 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:11:26 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <001d01c34003$f05e5760$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: as bad as Bart put it ? Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:06:55 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Katinka and all of you, My views are only views: As I remember you emailed and gave out some advice on how I could or should react towards Bart here at Theos-Talk. I say: Please let us not make this into a witchhunt on Bart. In the below email you give out your own as I understand it: - assumptions. Let us remember, that assumptions are not the same as facts. I said in the previous email: "I think I know, what I am doing." Your below answer is apparently not accepting this position. If I need polishing, what do you Katinka as a single individual think that aught to be ? (Aeehm...With some afterhought. Would you email me privately ? That would be polite...) I do care...even if you the reader do'nt think so. Do you - the reader - care ? I got one private email from a reader - who hav'nt posted anything recently. The reader was happy about my small stories and allegories. That made me happy. You mention something about - imaging evil motives. I just do'nt understand where that came from. I have said it before, that it is more how people react to the emails I write than what they contain, which concerns me. If I have to degrade my self (for a while) while emailing, to make some readers become motivated towards walking the Path with a stronger effort, - then I would do so. Would'nt you ? This said, - I will agree with Bart on one thing. From time to time my own English/US-English is'nt the best. But let us remember, that Theos-Talk is an international place. This should urge, at least the wellmeaning, participants to do their best to understand or grasp the content of postings coming from different cultures than their own. Katinka should we close the subject on Bart ? This emailing almost turns into a witchhunt on Bart. And I do'nt like that. Feel free to comment or do your best... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Katinka Hesselink" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:37 PM Subject: Theos-World RE: as bad as Bart put it ??? > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" theosophy@a...> wrote: > > And my relation to Bart, or at least one relation, - is - that Bart > > has to learn > > stop being - so - rude. > > Bart has his mission and agenda. Much will be revealed about that > > if one reads most of Barts emails made here at Theos-Talk. > Hi Morten, > > Having been online with Bart on some of the same e-mail lists for > years and years and years, (almost as long as I've been active on e- > mailgroups at all), I think I can tell you that there isn't much more > than meets the eye in Bart, in the sense that I don't think there is > any ulterior motive. He thinks he sees a wrong and tries to correct > it. That is all - now maybe his way of presenting himself might be > polished, but then, the same might be said of you. I don't think I > would be wrong in saying that you are both equally devoted to your > respective branches of theosophy, but you happen to have quite > different interpretations of how to go about it. > > It is always easier to spot the beam in somebody elses eye and on top > of that, to imagine some evil purpose behind the beam. We would all > (including myself I suspect) make our lives a lot easier if we > stopped guessing at peoples motives (especially online) and > restricted our feedback to people's actions. > > Katinka > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From bartl@sprynet.com Tue Jul 01 12:56:16 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: bartl@sprynet.com X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 96988 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 19:56:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 19:56:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.22) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 19:56:13 -0000 Received: from nycmny1-ar7-4-3-084-167.nycmny1.elnk.dsl.genuity.net ([4.3.84.167] helo=sprynet.com) by hawk.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XREa-0005U0-00 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 12:56:12 -0700 Message-ID: <3F01E748.5080404@sprynet.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 15:55:52 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Bart Lidofsky X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=690370 X-Yahoo-Profile: bml07646 Morten Nymann Olesen wrote: > I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the > Mahatma Letters to be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. We can never be 100% certain of anything. All we can be is more or less certain. While we cannot take the information written in the Mahatma letters as certainty, or even near-certainty, they are more certain than, for example, information anybody on this list writes without attribution. In other words, to choose whether to accept something or not, we take all the evidence available, evaluate it, and decide for ourselves. While argument from authority does not mean that something is true or untrue, it does increase the probability that it is true. Bart From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 12:58:04 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 99559 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 19:58:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 19:58:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepc.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.4) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 19:58:02 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 8E03E262A1A for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:57:55 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <002701c3400a$6f136ae0$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> <004101c33ff7$63307d20$7dfb56d1@idapingala> Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 21:53:24 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Wry and all of you, I was impressed with your email this time. Not, that you thanked me, but this one - and I quote you in the below: "To put it gently, there is a good chance that the Blavatsky > material has lost a lot of its baraka. This is not good or bad, in that it > always happens and is to be expected, but unless this is accounted for, > there is going to be a lot of wasted effort and a continued pouring from the > empty into the void. What is baraka and how is it created? I believe this > has something to do with a conscious aim in relationship to the physical > substances that are created and emanated from a certain individual or > individuals as a result of the making of a conscious effort to realize this > aim. " I think this is an important statement. But different branches like Alice A. Bailey's, Torkom Saraydarian's, Summit Lighthous'ers, and others with their own recently deceased personlity - or the like - will maybe just ignore that statement. That was why I some days back offered these: http://home19.inet.tele.dk/global-theosophy/BLAVATSK.HTM (Try only Chapter 1) and http://home19.inet.tele.dk/global-theosophy/SUFI2.HTM (Try reading this) I am open for enhancements and constructive criticism to the content of the last link. This goes for all the readers of this link. (I know the website needs improvement...) One version of Baraka is explained here: The value for a student to go to a Theosophical meeting with a real wise teacher is the following. Without saying anything the teacher emanates special designs, forces and energies and heals the crowd etc. Just being near such a person is important. You do'nt even need to talk with the teacher. This emanation of energies and forces or designs is Baraka - if it is truely spiritual. But who is to tell, which teacher is doing so? The beginner student does'nt really know that. Another verison of Baraka. The accepted view among Theosophists is: Blavatsky was spiritual. Some of the Masters supported the writing of the book The Secret Doctrine and creation of the Theosophical Movement at least in its earliest days. Therefore there is a Baraka emanating around this book and the Theosophical movement in general. Two questions: Where do you live Wry ? How do you learn how to learn ? Feel free to comment or do your best... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "wry" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:37 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > Hi. This is not a response to you in particular, Morton, but a general > comment on this subject. If we look back too much and in the wrong way, we > will turn into pillars of salt, as in the story of Sodom and Gommorah. There > is no way to balance things by doing this, and the imbalance leads to more > analysis and a further attachment to material. It is a maze and there is no > way out. It has nothing to do with me and my opinions whether this is true > or not. It is a law in that a certain approach can only lead to a certain > kind and quality of result. > > Moreover, re the Madame Blavatsky's material including the letters of the > Mahatmas, whether they be real or fake, being time-appropriate. It is most > interesting that I have had to present this idea to anyone who is an > educated theosophist and that this idea originally encountered so much > resistance (though this seems to be gradually changing) and that so much > hostility was expressed toward me for doing so, as this is so obvious and > any good scholar of this kind of material could see it at first glance. > Moreover, it is my opinion that until this idea is understood and accepted, > things will be log jammed to a very large extent and people will miss the > opportunity to use what is appropriate for this time and age from Madame > Blavatsky's teachings and apply it to the formation of a univeral > brotherhood. To put it gently, there is a good chance that the Blavatsky > material has lost a lot of its baraka. This is not good or bad, in that it > always happens and is to be expected, but unless this is accounted for, > there is going to be a lot of wasted effort and a continued pouring from the > empty into the void. What is baraka and how is it created? I believe this > has something to do with a conscious aim in relationship to the physical > substances that are created and emanated from a certain individual or > individuals as a result of the making of a conscious effort to realize this > aim. It is a most interesting subject and Morton does seem to be pointing us > in the direction of exploring this. For now, maybe it is at least something > to ponder about. Sincerely, Wry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:18 AM > Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > Hi Daniel and all of you, > > > > My views are only views: > > > > I was searching a little and I got this page: > > http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/on_shearman.html > > > > I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the > > Mahatma Letters to > > be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. > > > > That is just my conclusion. > > > > Feel free to agree or disagree...etc... > > > > > > from > > M. Sufilight with peace and love... > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Daniel Caldwell" > > To: ".DanielHCaldwell" > > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:16 AM > > Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > > > > I've updated the following useful webpage: > > > > > > "Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources" > > > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/hpblinks.htm > > > > > > Feedback welcomed! > > > > > > Daniel H. Caldwell > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > From global-theosophy@adslhome.dk Tue Jul 01 13:14:54 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: global-theosophy@adslhome.dk X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 45877 invoked from network); 1 Jul 2003 20:14:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Jul 2003 20:14:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pfepc.post.tele.dk) (193.162.153.4) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2003 20:14:52 -0000 Received: from kidhr (0x50a12fd9.arcnxx9.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk [80.161.47.217]) by pfepc.post.tele.dk (Postfix) with SMTP id 5BA092629F5 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2003 22:14:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <003601c3400c$cc9974a0$d92fa150@opasia.dk> To: References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> <3F01E748.5080404@sprynet.com> Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 22:10:20 +0200 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 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=106996622 X-Yahoo-Profile: kidhr7 Hi Bart and all of you, I agree. Your words are good. Except for this: "We can never be 100% certain of anything." My knowledge tells me, that this is not a true statement theosophically speaking. To me as a Theosophist - ParaBrahman is real, and is 100% certain on everything. I know I can become one with ParaBrahman. Bhagavad Gita also states this as a fact: "When all created things have passed away; This is that Life named the Unmanifest, The Infinite! the All! the Uttermost. Thither arriving none return. That Life Is Mine, and I am there! And, Prince! by faith Which wanders not, there is a way to come Thither. I, the PURUSHA, I Who spread The Universe around me -- in Whom dwell All living Things -- may so be reached and seen!" (Bhagavad Gita: "The Song Celestial" by Sir Edwin Arnold) Other translations gives the same. When we reach there we never return as humans again. That is my knowledge. Others might disagree. Feel free to comment or do your best... from M. Sufilight with peace and love... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bart Lidofsky" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 9:55 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > Morten Nymann Olesen wrote: > > I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the > > Mahatma Letters to be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. > > We can never be 100% certain of anything. All we can be is more or less > certain. While we cannot take the information written in the Mahatma > letters as certainty, or even near-certainty, they are more certain > than, for example, information anybody on this list writes without > attribution. In other words, to choose whether to accept something or > not, we take all the evidence available, evaluate it, and decide for > ourselves. While argument from authority does not mean that something is > true or untrue, it does increase the probability that it is true. > > Bart > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From dalval14@earthlink.net Tue Jul 01 17:25:05 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 20783 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 00:25:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2003 00:25:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.46) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 00:25:04 -0000 Received: from pool1066.cvx16-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.54.46] helo=earthlink) by grebe.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XVQj-0001Xl-00; Tue, 01 Jul 2003 17:25:01 -0700 To: Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: wisdom : Theory and Practice Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 17:26:30 -0700 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) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal From: "dalval14" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Tuesday, July 01, 2003 Dear Katinka: It is not a question of being loyal to the personalities we know of as H PB (or think we know something of) as the MAHATMAS. It is a question of getting as the SOURCE and BASIS of our philosophy, and finding out if it is TRUE. I take nothing on "faith." I grant everyone the same freedom as myself in thinking and seeking. I also decry and scoff at no one except when error is plain, and than I scoff (if ever) at the error and never as the person. This is because I can sense the same universal, impersonal and deific PRESENCE in every one. The Personality can err, but not the MONAD. Try that on Bowen's NOTES. Their value in innate in spite of all the physical and scholarly questioning. Also it diverts an inquirer from that which might help him or her. To me the whole affair is an utter waste of time and energy. It is also evidence of a continuous attempt to undermine the values of theosophical teachings. And I thin we can all see that. What then do we doubt? Ourselves? H P B ? Masters ? Do we place our entire trust in our own power to think? Have we NEVER MADE AY ERRORS IN JUDGMENT? Are we always so very ultimately and universally SURE ? I matters of Theosophical truths the century of our time has very little value (to me). I am not impressed, my approach has always been IS IT TRUE AND VERIFIABLE ? What H P B might say or do at present would not to my way of mind and study be much different from what she has always said and done from 1875 up to 1891. There is there an undeviating line of coherence. I trust and use that as a touch-stone. Just as you rust your mind and decisions. So do we agree or so we agree to disagree? And if so on what grounds? Best wishes, as always, Dallas ======================== -----Original Message----- From: Katinka Hesselink [mailto:mail@katinkahesselink.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 5:40 AM To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Subject: Theos-World Re: wisdom : Theory and Practice Hi Dallas, I have only one very short answer to that one. Which facts and thoughts are you ignoring while being so loyal to Blavatsky and the Mahatmas? -- And now for a longer elaboration of where that question is coming from: I found out just how this process works while looking again at the Bowen Notes I wrote about a few weeks ago, how there is doubt whether they report an actual conversation with Blavatsky. So I looked the notes up and reviewed what I found and came up with quite a few things that I had previously simply ignored - keeping aloof, because HPB "probably had a point". With all due respect to HPB, I don't think putting the products of her mind a century ago, over my alive mind now, is helpfull. I mean, if there were a live HPB sitting here in my study, it would be different, but even then I hope I would be honest enough to ask the questions, voice my doubts etc. What use is silently and demurely saying aye and amen to her words? Bowen notes plus footnotes found at: http://www.katinkahesselink.net/metaphys/th-bowen.htm Now whether or not HPB aproved of the Bowen Notes isn't relevant to the present subject. What is relevant is that ultimately I have to decide for myself what I consider true. I can't keep my mind on the leash of those who supposedly knew better than me. (even if their track record of cooking is very good). I've had enough experience of science (for instance) saying one thing for years, when my instincts said something else - and then finding that years later science changed her mind, and my opinion is suddenly science based - to know that to trust anything other than my own instincts (where they have an opinion) is folly. Though this comes with the reservation that continuous self-observation is necessary in order to keep track of self-delusion. The above doesn't mean, by the way, that I am claiming to have The Truth in the palm of my hand. I certainly don't. All it means is that I don't think any of us should trust any authority, H.P. Blavatsky or anybody else, beyond what their own instincts confirm. And where ethics and self-study are concerned: I agree with Dallas, Blavatsky and the Mahatmas have written wonderful stuff. But where things like Atlantis, Lemuria and the race theories are concerned, things get very hazy. Fortunatly that stuff is hardly going to change our lives, whether true or untrue or largely veiled. Katinka --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "dalval14" wrote: > Sunday, June 29, 2003 > > Dear Friend, > > I have looked at the quotations (also familiar to me) you have > provided from the MAHATMA LETTERS > > > ">> (1) An adept - the highest as the lowest - is one only during > the > exercise of his occult powers.>> [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , p. > 180] > > and > > >> When the inner man rests the adept becomes an ordinary man, > limited to his physical senses and the functions of his physical > brain. Habit sharpens the intuition of the latter, yet is unable > to > make them supersensuous. The inner adept is ever ready, ever on > the > alert, and that suffices for our purposes. At moments of rest > then, > his faculties are at rest also. >> [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , > p. 180] > > and > > >>Couple this with the unpleasant fact that we are forbidden to > use > one particle of our powers in connexion with the Eclectics >> > [ Barker, MAHATMA LETTERS , p. 181] > > From letter 24b (old order) or 85b chronological. > Copied from the CD-ROM." > > Your conclusions read: > > "If that is so, then they are likely to be at fault, in the case > of details. And unfortunately, what we consider important, or > mere detail, is likely to be different from what they considered > important or detail. > > In short: the material provided by Mahatmas and Blavatsky is in > the same position as every other piece of food put before us by a > good cook: edible and useful until proven to be unhealthy or > spoilt. And where different spiritual teachers agree - they are > more likely to have gotten it right. So that I would say - we > should sample different spiritual teachings in order to be able > to judge correctly." > > My view is that > > First: I am not competent to decide, using by brain-mind, what H > P B sand Mahatmas write and teach is incorrect. > > I would consider that presumptuous in view of the fact that all I > have so far studied is coherent and dovetails into a whole. > There are many statements that I have not understood. I set > those aside for continual future consideration. In most cases I > have found later corroboration I do not conclude swiftly that > "They" are wrong or "inaccurately written." My knowledge is far > less comprehensive than Theirs. So I am willing to study further > to find out if there is something I had missed. > > Second: I can exercise my free will to check for logic, > potential truth, reasonableness and "common sense" all statements > made, but that does not entitle me to decide on their accuracy, > nor to tell others that I think I have found errors, nor further, > try to CHANGE those teachings to suit my petty conclusions. > > Third: I am unwilling to say that they are WRONG in any detail, > especially as the Master writes that he had thoroughly reviewed, > corrected and annotated The SECRET DOCTRINE. That stands for > something. > > Theosophy may not please all. At best, as their pupils, we can > but bow and say we will try to learn. If, however we consider we > are not their pupils, then, I suppose that appears to free us to > say anything, whether fully reasoned or not. > > However I, being very cautious in all such matter, start with > asking questions and not stating opinions. > > But I also recognize others' right and freedom to adopt any > attitude they please. > > Personally, I have too much respect for these great Personages, > and would be glad it they accepted me as their lowest pupil. > > Best wishes, > > Dallas Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From dalval14@earthlink.net Wed Jul 02 02:51:25 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 712 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 09:51:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2003 09:51:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.54) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 09:51:24 -0000 Received: from pool0145.cvx36-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.18.145] helo=earthlink) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XeD6-0003EM-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 02:47:33 -0700 To: "AA-Dal" Subject: Wadia -- Hammering out our Character Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 02:48:44 -0700 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 V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "dalval14" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wednesday, July 02, 2003 Dear Friends: The following is important for us all --------------------------------------------------------------- by B. P. Wadia HAMMERING OUT OUR CHARACTER =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =93Character is what God and the angels know of us.=94 -- TOM PAINE The educator and the social reformer of today are asking questions. How to enable the learner at school and college to fashion his own character deliberately, scientifically? How to educate the citizen so that by himself he is able to recognize his moral responsibilities? How to elevate the political animal to the status of a moral man accountable for his conduct to his own conscience? So-called religious education and moral education have failed as instruments for character-building. Thoreau's question must find an answer, "How can we expect a harvest of thought who have not had a seed-time of character?" If as THE MAHABHARATA points out, the mark of Dharma (Religion, Law, and Duty) is good conduct, then organized religions, codes of law, instruction about the performance of duties, have not succeeded. Why? Parents and teachers who try to build the characters of the young, or the adults who desire to mould and reshape their own, do not quite get the significance of a statement of Froude: "You cannot dream yourself into a character; you must hammer and forge yourself one." Emotions play a major part in human behavior. They provide the motor power for human actions. They imply motion. They move heavenwards under the impact and influence of the Spirit on the human mind and we have noble aspirations. Lower desires, on the other hand, arise from the response of our sensorium to mundane objects, which now attract, then repel, causing pleasures and pains and ending in, frustration. The Chinese, Mencius, refers to this dual nature of our character: "He who attends to his greater self becomes a great man and he who attends to his smaller self becomes a small man." Why are high aspirations necessary for the building of character? How do low desires affect conduct? What part do Will and resolutions play in the activity of the emotions? What part, Thought and knowledge? Character building and the science of conduct are very amorphous subjects in the body of modern knowledge. Its devotees do not know what definite purpose underlies human evolution. Nor do they suspect that laws of Nature are intelligent expressions of sub-mundane and super-mundane intelligences. Devas and Devatas, Powers and Principalities, and Angels and Archangels are not realities to men of modern knowledge as they were to sages and to seers of the ancient world. Our educators can never succeed in formulating the method of building character or of assigning true values to human conduct or behavior till they study the ancient doctrine of the existence of invisible worlds with their denizens and citizens, and the influence of these on human beings -- infants and adults alike. The fundamental teachings of the ancient philosophy are: (1) Everything in the universe, throughout all its kingdoms, is conscious, i.e.., endowed with a consciousness of its own kind and on its own plane of perception. (2) The universe is worked and guided from within outwards. We see that every external motion, act, gesture, whether voluntary or mechanical, organic or mental, is produced and preceded by internal feeling or emotion, will or volition, and thought or mind. As no outward motion or change, when normal, in man's external body can take place unless provoked by an inward impulse, given through one of the three functions named, so with the external and manifested Universe. The whole Kosmos is guided, controlled, and animated by almost endless series of Hierarchies of sentient Beings, each having a mission to perform. (3) These Intelligences are dual in character: being composed of (a) the irrational brute energy, inherent in matter, and (b) the intelligent soul or cosmic consciousness which directs and guides that energy. (4) Man is a compound of the essences of all those celestial Hierarchies, and MAY succeed in making himself, as such, superior, in one sense, to any or all of them. (5) Man WILL succeed if he knows himself, i.e., his constitution, visible and invisible, sensuous, psychic, and spiritual, and then endeavors to develop his divine aspirations while starving his mundane desires. To appreciate the greater ideals set forth by Bhishma in THE ANUSHASANA PARVA, CIV, the aid of the above teachings becomes essential.=20 Says THE MAHABHARATA: =93Thou shouldst know that conduct is the root of prosperity. Conduct is the enhancer of fame. It is conduct that prolongs life. It is conduct that destroys all calamities and evils. Conduct has been said to be superior to all the branches of knowledge. It is conduct that begets righteousness. Conduct is the most efficacious rite of propitiating the deities.=94 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [From THUS HAVE I HEARD, pages 296-98.] D T B [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dalval14@earthlink.net Wed Jul 02 03:36:45 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 96297 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 10:36:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2003 10:36:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.54) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 10:36:43 -0000 Received: from pool0034.cvx12-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.226.34] helo=earthlink) by conure.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XeyD-0004WS-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 03:36:14 -0700 To: "AA-BN--Study" Subject: Yoacharya Buddhism Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 03:37:48 -0700 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 V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "dalval14" Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable July 2 2003 This is an important contribution to understanding the relationship of Theosophy to esoteric Buddhism , The relationship includes the VOICE OF THE SILENCE . Best wishes, Dallas =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D YOGACH=C2RYA BUDDHISM THE MYSTICISM OF YOGACH=C2RYA BUDDHISM By Radhakamal Mukerjee =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D One of the most subtle doctrines of contemplative Mysticism was that developed by the Yogachara School of Mahayana Buddhism. This school developed in India in the fifth century A.D. in the hands of the two brothers of Gandhara -- Vasuvandhu and Asanga -- who both spent part of their lives in Oudh. The great characteristic of this Buddhist school of thought is that by the methods of dialectic a doctrine was reached in which pure knowledge and mystical ecstasy became inseparable. H.P. Blavatsky points out in her THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY that: =93There are two Yogacharya Schools, one esoteric, the other popular. The doctrines of the latter were compiled and glossed by Asamgha in the sixth century of our era, and his mystic tantras and mantras, his formularies, litanies, spells and mudras, would certainly, if attempted without a Guru, serve rather purposes of sorcery and black magic than real Yoga.=94 Again she says, =93Aryasangha was the Founder of the first Yogacharya School. This Arhat, a direct disciple of Gautama, the Buddha, is most unaccountably mixed up and confounded with a personage of the same name, who is said to have lived in Ayodhya (Oude) about the fifth or sixth century of our era, and taught Tantrika worship in addition to the Yogacharya system. Those who sought to make it popular, claimed that he was the same Aryasangha, that had been a follower of Sakyamuni, and that he was 1,000 years old. Internal evidence alone is sufficient to show that the works written by him and translated about the year 600 of our era, works full of Tantra worship, ritualism and tenets followed now considerably by the "red-cap" sects in Sikkim, Bhutan, and Little Tibet, cannot be the same as the lofty system of the early Yogacharya school of pure Buddhism which is neither northern nor southern, but absolutely esoteric.=20 Though none of the genuine Yogacharya books (the NARJOL CHODPA) have ever been made public or marketable, yet one finds in the YOGACHARYA BUHMI SHASTRA of the pseudo-Aryasangha a great deal from the older system, into the tenets of which he may have been initiated. It is, however, so mixed up with Sivaism and Tantrika magic and superstitions, that the work defeats its own end, notwithstanding its remarkable dialectical subtlety.=94 According to this idealistic school, all objects are created by the mind itself. It is the pure idea that is produced as an external object. Says Vasuvandhu: =93 It is knowledge itself that appears as object; all this is only idea that appears as object, which in Reality does not exist.=94 The analogy is drawn from the perception of a picture for denying the objective value of knowledge. =93 In a picture painted according to the rules there are neither hollow nor raised parts, and yet one seizes them; thus in the imagination there is never duality and yet one seizes it.=94 Thus in Yogachara all duality in the phenomenon of representation is banished. There no longer exists either apprehender or apprehended, as Asanga says, nor the ego and the world. There remains only a cosmic absolute Vijnana or knowledge that is an infinite ever-fluent series. All objects in the universe, all mental constructs, all differentiation of subject and object, consist of the Alaya-Vijnana, the absolute Cosmic Consciousness. In THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, Alaya is defined as "the Universal Soul or Atma, each man having a ray of it in him and being supposed to be able to identify himself with and to merge himself into it." There is here an essential similarity with the Atmadvaita of Sankara. Yet there is also the strong distinctive characteristic of the Buddhist Vijnanadvaita that pure knowledge which is anterior to the subject and object and the act of knowledge is only Becoming. Writes Houan-Tsang: =93As the river struck by the winds gives birth to waves without its flow being interrupted, so the Alaya-Vijnana, without a break in its perpetual flux, produces temporary thoughts . . . From all time, the Alaya-Vijnana flows thus like a river without interruption.=94 When all notions of diversification of the knower, known and knowledge are banished as fictitious, when the subject and the object become only aspects of Vijnana or knowledge itself, there is discovered in the end beneath the phenomena or rather in them the Suchness. The conception of the Suchness or Absolute Nature of things (Tathata) is one of the most delicate and profound mystical notions in the Buddhist philosophy. The Suchness eludes all definition, and thus as in the Upanishads the Reality is sought to be defined by an accumulation and balancing of opposite categories, so also does the Vijnanabadi try to reach an approximation of Absolute Nature by effacing the distinction between Being and Not Being, Ideality and Reality, Samsara and Nirvana. In fact, the Tathata can be apprehended only by a mystical rapport. It is only in mystical insight that the human being can pass beyond the distinctions of the ego and the world, beyond all mental constructs. The Suchness is the strangest, simplest, and boldest definition of Reality. It defines the indefinable and inexpressible. It does not lead the mind to any void, because it is something positive. On the other hand, in an absolutist idealism that is in ceaseless Becoming, the Suchness is the permanent, all-comprehensive datum. Only by mystical illumination could this Suchness be apprehended. Dharmapala observed that the Suchness is a mere tentative description adopted only to save one from the error of identifying it with nothingness. Thus the predicate Bhava or Existence is pointed. Asanga says of the Suchness: =93It can neither be called existence nor non-existence; It is neither "such" nor "otherwise." It is neither born nor destroyed; It neither increases nor decreases; It is neither purity nor faith. Such is the real lakshana (mark) of the Transcendental Truth (Suchness).=94 The same idea that the true state of Suchness in only born of mystical illumination when all language or meaning of language is completely abjured is also evident in Asvaghosa's definition of Suchness: =93As soon as you grasp that, when totality (universality) of existence is spoken of or thought of, there is neither that which speaks, nor that which is spoken of; neither that which thinks, nor that which is thought of; then you conform to Suchness; and when your subjectivity is thus completely obliterated, it is then that you may be said to have insight.=94 It is a familiar experience in the path of mystical insight that the Reality is reached through a gradual but completed negation of all attributes and conditions, which betoken relativity and individuality. In the Upanishadic mysticism, the Reality is reached through a process of elevated contemplation, which avoids all relativities and subjectivities as neti, neti (not this, not this). It is the other; and this negation becomes the description of the Reality itself. Unlike any other contemplative mysticism, the Yogachara school has developed elaborate modes of contemplation in stages and parts leading up to the transcendent Suchness. This is described by them as Asamskrita dharma and ought to have its appeal to modern minds. The stages of consciousness that lead up to absence of all conditions, i.e., the Samskritas, which like spots bedim the pure bright mirror of Reality are: (1) The freedom of akasa, all-comprehensive, limitless unchangeable. (2) Freedom from all kinds of bodily conditions and attributes (klesas). (3) Freedom of effortlessness which is obtained without the aid of Knowledge. (4) Freedom from the motivation of pain and pleasure. (5) Freedom from the activation of conscious processes. Such are the stages in the development of mystical insight in its highest reaches, each stage representing a distinct manifestation of Reality. At the final, the sixth stage, freedom in the eternal, unchangeable, and transcendent Suchness is established. In the Upanishadic mysticism, however, the stress is on affirmation. The Reality, though likewise absolute, unconditioned, and indefinable, has a positive aspect as something eternal and immutable and completely comprising all things that live, move and disappear into it. In the Upanishadic description of Reality, the affirmative note dominates over the negative note, which is stronger in Buddhist mysticism though in both the dual attitudes exist side by side. As a matter of fact even in Asvaghosa, the Suchness is conceived in its two aspects: first trueness as negation (Sunyata) and secondly, trueness as affirmation (Asunyata). Much more significant than this is the difference between Upanishadic and Yogachara mysticism arising in the latter's idea of Reality as a process, a ceaseless Becoming, a continuous series, akin to the phenomenological tendency of modern thought. The Suchness is the message of Silence, the essence of effortless contemplation. Here thought and vacuation, affirmation and negation are both baffled. For the transcendent can be neither posited nor denied. Truth transcends both the affirmation and the negation of thought. The mystical height is at once sublime and terrifying. For it cuts the roots of our flow of life and knowledge. Yet when it is reached by rare, adventurous souls, it is found as the inmost of our being and becoming, embracing every being and every thing in the world in one simultaneous all-comprehensive illumination and compassion. by Radhakamal Mukerjee =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D DTB [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From wry1111@earthlink.net Wed Jul 02 09:19:02 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: wry1111@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 45243 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 16:19:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2003 16:19:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.123) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 16:19:00 -0000 Received: from user-38lc05i.dialup.mindspring.com ([209.86.0.178] helo=idapingala) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XkJs-0000BR-00 for theos-talk@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 09:18:57 -0700 Message-ID: <001401c340b5$48e17820$b20056d1@idapingala> To: References: <20030701001610.79459.qmail@web41012.mail.yahoo.com> <000601c33fa9$64100420$d92fa150@opasia.dk> <004101c33ff7$63307d20$7dfb56d1@idapingala> <002701c3400a$6f136ae0$d92fa150@opasia.dk> Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 09:16:23 -0700 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 Morton. I am not sure the teacher needs to be alive for there to still be baraka. In my opinion, it is the potential shockpoints of the aim, so to speak, that contain and amplifies the emanations of the participants as they strive to fufill the unique and ever changing requirements that will lead to its actualization. But when a form that suits the accomplishment of requirements that have already been actualized is rigidly adhered to, it is no longer alive in that there is not much force, there no longer being the same level of necessity.. I am putting this in rather broad terms. We would have to look at the work of Madame Blavatsky very carefully to determine what her aim was. If we say her aim was to create a universal brotherhood, even though this may have been her aim, it may not put the finger on her exact aim, as this is too broad to relate to specific doing. If we say her aim was to present certain concepts to the west in a form in which they could be assimilated, this is probably closer to the truth. We all have a pretty good idea of what these ideas were and how and if they were assimilated. In the specific time in which this was being done, a specific need was present which corresponded to this doing like a hollow cave or a cup receive what goes into it. When people moved in relationship to the perceived necessity of actualizing this aim, there was a certain charge and quality due to the specific relevance of their movements in relationship to this.. Of course my interpretation of her aim could be wrong, but my sense is that it is accurate,. Imagine being one little person in the whole big world and then seeing something truly major you could do that might profoundly effect the course of the development of future human beings. Imagine being a part of this, which was all new, the thrill of it, the imbuement of being in that time and place and acting in relationship to this, always discovering new connections and linking things up in such a way that certain happenings could occur, as if by magic, but in actuality, only having to do with knowing how to make a good plan and insert certain shocks so it would not deflect. Imagine the joy. All this "charge" was presumably communicated to the people who surrounded Madame Blavatsky, not so much by her, but by the act of their own participation in relationship to what she was doing, which amplified their own emanations, so to speak. This is a different time in the world, and now there are other major projects to do, as exciting as Madame Blavatsky's. Perhaps we need a visionary to put things together in such a way that we can participate in such a project. On a certain level, at a certain time, each person is free to create his own project which suits his own capabilities at the same time it corresponds to a need, but petty little people tend to get lost in petty little projects. Do not be misled about each person working alone from his own intuition. In my opinion, though some good works may be accomplished, greater doing will not happen in this way, as the intuition becomes mixed up with the personality and blunted by such. This is kindergarten and though each person will have to struggle to learn the alphabet, and maybe even to tie his shoes, we are all in the class together. The person who participles in making it a better class will become the helper of the teacher. . Since we have no teacher on this list , if we create the right atmosphere, maybe what you call the Mahatmas will touch us here, in an act of grace. What does it mean to be touched by grace? In my opinion, specific, well applied efforts by a little individual or individuals combine in such a way as to form a set that can open a doorway for an angel, but if you think of that angel the next time, it is no longer grace, because the memory of the angel undermines the attetntiveness to what one is doing. which is what has attracted him in the first place. I do not understand how human beings can expect to rely on the appearances of angels, since they rarely appear. If everything is already whole, it is whole, but, if not, doing consciously from earth connects us to another plane in such a way that something else can enter and make it whole for me. It is the art of making sense. Of course if we make total sense, we will be graced, as there is nothing else left to do, and sometimes we can create or connect to a shaft where grace enters, but the average person seems hell bent to make things chaotic, as he wants to do something, anything, before he knows what or how. If the conscious manifestation of the body is the doorway to the divine. I believe the appropriate step to take is that of self study, and that it is pointless and irrelevant to talk about conditioning or unconditioning theosophists.It is ourselves who are conditioned. When the conditioning is recorded, the material will be released, as when you see, in present time, that you are conditioned,, then you are less conditioned re to whatever degree you have seen this. I do not see the point of your article. To me it is a form of intellectualization akin to day dreaming. I do not understand how it can relate to the daily lives of any of us on here in such a way that we can be changed. If you could speak in simple words and tell of your own experience, perhaps I could relate to you better. Also, I did not like what you said to Katinka in your recent message. You implied she was undermining Bart when what she was doing just the opposite. To me this is dishonest. Sincerely, Wry. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 12:53 PM Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > Hi Wry and all of you, > > I was impressed with your email this time. > Not, that you thanked me, but this one - and I quote you in the below: > > "To put it gently, there is a good chance that the Blavatsky > > material has lost a lot of its baraka. This is not good or bad, in that it > > always happens and is to be expected, but unless this is accounted for, > > there is going to be a lot of wasted effort and a continued pouring from > the > > empty into the void. What is baraka and how is it created? I believe this > > has something to do with a conscious aim in relationship to the physical > > substances that are created and emanated from a certain individual or > > individuals as a result of the making of a conscious effort to realize > this > > aim. " > > I think this is an important statement. > But different branches like Alice A. Bailey's, Torkom Saraydarian's, Summit > Lighthous'ers, > and others with their own recently deceased personlity - or the like - will > maybe just ignore that statement. > That was why I some days back offered these: > http://home19.inet.tele.dk/global-theosophy/BLAVATSK.HTM (Try only Chapter > 1) and > http://home19.inet.tele.dk/global-theosophy/SUFI2.HTM (Try reading this) > I am open for enhancements and constructive criticism to the content of the > last link. > This goes for all the readers of this link. > (I know the website needs improvement...) > > > One version of Baraka is explained here: > The value for a student to go to a Theosophical meeting with a real wise > teacher is the following. > Without saying anything the teacher emanates special designs, forces and > energies and heals the crowd etc. Just being near such a person is > important. You do'nt even need to talk with the teacher. > This emanation of energies and forces or designs is Baraka - if it is truely > spiritual. > But who is to tell, which teacher is doing so? The beginner student does'nt > really know that. > > Another verison of Baraka. The accepted view among Theosophists is: > Blavatsky was spiritual. Some of the Masters supported the writing of the > book The Secret Doctrine and creation of the Theosophical Movement at least > in its earliest days. Therefore there is a Baraka emanating around this book > and the Theosophical movement in general. > > > > Two questions: > Where do you live Wry ? > How do you learn how to learn ? > > Feel free to comment or do your best... > > from > M. Sufilight with peace and love... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "wry" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:37 PM > Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > Hi. This is not a response to you in particular, Morton, but a general > > comment on this subject. If we look back too much and in the wrong way, we > > will turn into pillars of salt, as in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. > There > > is no way to balance things by doing this, and the imbalance leads to more > > analysis and a further attachment to material. It is a maze and there is > no > > way out. It has nothing to do with me and my opinions whether this is > true > > or not. It is a law in that a certain approach can only lead to a certain > > kind and quality of result. > > > > Moreover, re the Madame Blavatsky's material including the letters of the > > Mahatmas, whether they be real or fake, being time-appropriate. It is most > > interesting that I have had to present this idea to anyone who is an > > educated theosophist and that this idea originally encountered so much > > resistance (though this seems to be gradually changing) and that so much > > hostility was expressed toward me for doing so, as this is so obvious and > > any good scholar of this kind of material could see it at first glance. > > Moreover, it is my opinion that until this idea is understood and > accepted, > > things will be log jammed to a very large extent and people will miss the > > opportunity to use what is appropriate for this time and age from Madame > > Blavatsky's teachings and apply it to the formation of a univeral > > brotherhood. To put it gently, there is a good chance that the Blavatsky > > material has lost a lot of its baraka. This is not good or bad, in that it > > always happens and is to be expected, but unless this is accounted for, > > there is going to be a lot of wasted effort and a continued pouring from > the > > empty into the void. What is baraka and how is it created? I believe this > > has something to do with a conscious aim in relationship to the physical > > substances that are created and emanated from a certain individual or > > individuals as a result of the making of a conscious effort to realize > this > > aim. It is a most interesting subject and Morton does seem to be pointing > us > > in the direction of exploring this. For now, maybe it is at least > something > > to ponder about. Sincerely, Wry > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:18 AM > > Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > > > > Hi Daniel and all of you, > > > > > > My views are only views: > > > > > > I was searching a little and I got this page: > > > http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/on_shearman.html > > > > > > I think it proves, that one just should NOT blindly rely on any of the > > > Mahatma Letters to > > > be true or untrue in any manner what so ever. > > > > > > That is just my conclusion. > > > > > > Feel free to agree or disagree...etc... > > > > > > > > > from > > > M. Sufilight with peace and love... > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Daniel Caldwell" > > > To: ".DanielHCaldwell" > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 2:16 AM > > > Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources > > > > > > > > > > I've updated the following useful webpage: > > > > > > > > "Blavatsky/Theosophy Websites & Resources" > > > > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/hpblinks.htm > > > > > > > > Feedback welcomed! > > > > > > > > Daniel H. Caldwell > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > From dalval14@earthlink.net Wed Jul 02 10:58:52 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: dalval14@earthlink.net X-Apparently-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 63163 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2003 17:58:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Jul 2003 17:58:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net) (207.217.120.74) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jul 2003 17:58:51 -0000 Received: from pool1152.cvx17-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.236.132] helo=earthlink) by falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 19XlsB-0006HT-00; Wed, 02 Jul 2003 10:58:27 -0700 To: "AA-BN--Study" Subject: RE: Wadia -- Hammering out our Character Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 10:59:44 -0700 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 V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: From: Reply-To: X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=52898573 X-Yahoo-Profile: dalval2 Wednesday, July 02, 2003 Dear M and Friends: Re Self-reform: I believe you did the right thing, to know your limits and work within them. As Hermes said of old: "Man, know thyself." >From that new basis you can choose to extend . Choose wisely, use universal principles, : virtues good for all. There are some good phrases (ideas) to remember. They have helped me, see if they help you. At the root base of our immortal self (Monad), we are the "soundless OM;" hence nothing is impossible, but in view of our past karma, and the karmic skandhas we are surrounded by, which we have shaped in the past through our choices, we have to use and reform, it takes time to do this. Violent reform and sudden compulsion evokes a violent reaction, and if we are not mentally prepared then we can be overwhelmed by the reacting disturbed passions (which represent our "past"). The "fight" is always through the Mind principle. [The whole of the BHAGAVAD GITA is about this, and the attainment of spiritual WISDOM by detachment of the Mind from the grip of passion.] It is between BUDDHI (wisdom) and KAMA or (passions and desire). The Mind has to be made dispassionate (freed of lower tendencies). We are now the "mind-beings: who can do this to, and for ourselves. This marvelous phrase is: "...the wise man learns to assume in the body an attitude of carelessness that is more careful really than any other." [Judge Letters, p. 37]... "Patience is needed in order that the passage of time required for the bodily instrument to be altered or controlled is complete. Violent control is not so good as gentle control, continuous and firmly unrelaxed..... Gentleness is better because an opposition current is always provoked, .... and, of course, if that which produces it is gentle, it will also be the same. This gives the unaccustomed student more time and gradual strength." [Judge Letters], p. 39. In the VOICE OF THE SILENCE we find the injunctions are clear: "Kill thy desires, Lanoo, make thy vices impotent, ere the first step is taken on the solemn journey. Strangle thy sins and make them dumb forever, before thou dost lift one foot to mount the ladder. Silence thy thoughts and fix thy whole attention on thy Master, whom yet thou dost not see, but whom thou feelest." (p. 17) ...Kill in thyself all memory of past experiences. Look not behind or thou art lost. (p. 18) See if these are helpful. Best wishes, Dallas ========================= I also found the following article useful: ------------------------ THE FUNCTION OF ATTENTION IN PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT TRUE study of any branch of knowledge consists in giving the matter of that branch such repetitions of attentive consideration that it at length becomes an integral part of the domain of the consciousness, and can at any time, under any correlated stimulus, be made use of by automatic mental action. True Study of an Art consists, primarily in the attentive repetitions of the action of the physiological organs, involved in the productions of that Art, until that action becomes automatic, and is as well and so naturally performed as any original reflex physiological function. In these definitions the word qualifying the necessary processes is the adjective attentive, denoting the presence of attention in the operation. Without this word the definitions would not merely be imperfect, they would be essentially incorrect and misleading. Only in the quality of being attentive can the reiterated consideration and the reiterated action, respectively, result in the possession, on the one hand, of a new realm of knowledge, or, on the other hand, of a new area of power. What is the nature and manner of expression of this supreme quality Attention? An appreciative intellectual grasp of the answer to this question and a realisation of the function of its subject in the processes of human personal evolution, should be recognised as fundamental elements in the knowledge and understanding of the true educationist, be he teacher or not. The word Attention is used largely, but loosely, in educational employments, yet we have no other word with which, habitually, to express that attitude of the consciousness which, in any study or acquisition of power, is absolutely and continuously demanded, in 154 order to ensure intrinsic results. The term concentration is more literally correct in this relation, but concentration has, with most persons, too limited and too special an application to render it available for ordinary use instead of Attention. Yet the Attention we are discussing, the attention of all knowledge-acquiring processes, may perhaps be better understood and realized if it is regarded as Concentrated Attention. Attention is that condition or attitude of conscious