Theos-Talk Archives (March 1998 Message tt00154)

    Who are you talking to, Philips?   Your single-sentence post is
replying to three full-length ones letters!

    What is wrong with us on this list?   Why aren't we editing our
posts properly?   Look at the quoted text below!    Mr. Spencer below
contributes one sentence(thanks for your suggestion), in response to all
the others.    So often, I see this.   Someone would respond to
another's message without editing it properly.   Are we so busy that we
neglect to trim down the quoted texts?

    Let's not be sloppy.   It's fine practice to quote others
sufficiently, but not too much.   It consumes download time and hard
disk space.

    Yours,

    Pat F.

Phillips Spencer wrote:

> You may find a great deal of help on this subject in "Light on The
> Path"
> by MC.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval@nwc.net>
> > Sent: Monday, March 16, 1998 4:27 PM
> > Subject: Re:Theos World - "Golden Precepts" of
> GdeP
> >
> > MKR -- I think you are quite right.  When we "forget ourselves" we
> > then can
> > act from a more universal basis -- but even then, it is better to
> act
> > with
> > a "knowledge of Law," than to guess at it, no matter how well
> > intentioned.
> >
> > There used to be a saying:  "The road to hell is paved with good
> > intentions!"  An old student of Theosophy was heard to say:  "It is
> > better
> > to have it paved, than not paved at all."
> >
> > My 2 pies worth !                     Dallas
> >
> >
> >
> >                                                           W. Dallas
> > TenBroeck
> >
> > dalval@nwc.net
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > | From: "M K Ramadoss" <ramadoss@eden.com>
> > | Subject: Re:Theos World - "Golden Precepts" of GdeP
> > | Date: Sunday, March 15, 1998 9:08 PM
> > |
> > | Hi
> > |
> > | Here is an analogy which may help you to relate what he seems to
> be
> > | talking. I am just attempting to understand.
> > |
> > | When you are deeply involved or concerned about someone you care
> > about at
> > | that moment (could be helping, defending etc) -- it could be even
> a
> > | stranger -- there is an element of self forgetfulness and in that
> > state
> > you
> > | do not "think" about your selves and the other person as
> > individuals. You
> > | are just concentrated and immersed in solving the problem at hand.
>
> > One
> > may
> > | attain a stage when you see the silliness and stupidity of others,
>
> > then
> > | there may be no need to defend oneselves.
> > |
> > | My 0.02
> > |
> > | MK.  R.
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > | At 11:16 AM 3/14/1998 +1200, you wrote:
> > | >Hi all,
> > | >
> > | >    Would anyone mind discussing Purucker's Golden Precepts of
> > | >Esotericism?    Much of it I can grasp and accept as practical,
> > e.g.
> > | >impersonality and love.   But he speaks of defending others,
> never
> > | >oneself.   As I understand it, he tells us that the initiate
> > forgets the
> > | >own self and lives entirely for others.  Living for others is
> fine
> > by
> > | >me; I think we should all devote some of our incarnations purely
> > for
> > | >others, once we are fit enough.   What I don't understand is the
> > | >teaching that the chela does not stand up if only to defend
> > | >him/herself.   GdeP wrote:
> > | >
> > | >    >Never strike back; never retaliate; be silent; be patient.
> > Protect
> > | >others; protect yourself not at all.
> > | >
> > | >    Is the student meant to take this quite literally?   Can
> > someone
> > | >please discuss this with us?
> > | >
> > | >    Thank you.
> > | >
> > | >    Yours,
> > | >    Pat F.
> > | >
> > |
> theos-talk@theosophy.com
> > |
> of
> >
> >
>
>
>

--
There is no opinion higher than truth.