Theos-Talk Archives (June 1998 Message tt00367)

OK, I can say something here.......
Here you guys go again getting all edgy over this "appearance or not of
Adepts, Masters", entities thing.
I mean, this is my point about quoting others.
Just supposing HPB wrote at a time when it wasn't the done thing to meet
in someone's living room and talk to someone from another plane (like it
was done by the majority of the middle and upper classes in her time)?
Or, suppose HPB was a peasant who saw entities and heard voices all the
time and was already labelled as "the harmless village idiot".
With her savvy she would have documented and spread the ideas but would
have left out the "visitation" bit and then this would never have become
such an issue!  The truth is the truth by any messanger!

Also, I recently witnessed a deep trance session in which the trancer
passed on "wisdom" from a group of entities, supposedly ascended and
watching over our progress.  Some people saw shapes around the trancer,
some felt a prescence.  I didn't even see an aura this time.  It was
also made quite clear that whatever the entities said was "filtered"
through the person passing it on.  This was abvious to me as nothing
that was said was beyond my comprehension, and I feel at least one thing
should have been.
In case any of you are interested, I did ask a question:
"Respectfully, in whatever way you choose to present it, what entity
was/is/will be the loudest silent communicator to us?"
The answer, after what appeared to be some hesitation or bickering, was
TREES.
Then followed a bunch of regular stuff and warnings and hints that we
all already know.

I've been contemplating that answer subconsciously since then.  When I
get the "message", it will be a mixture of every thing I have
remembered, read, postulated, analyzed, envisioned and intuited, through
past lives, gene transfer, grabbing bits of other people's wisdom,
tuning into the universal wisdom.  No?
Well, isn't that what HPB et al did?
So what's the hang up?

Well, it seems to be that we humans want to know, for sure, absolutely,
without a doubt......that we are correct!

When I was a young science student and struggling with life I spent a
week at a monastery.  No coincidence that they assigned me to what must
have been the youngest best looking celebate male I could have met.
After learning what it meant to concentrate and focus for real, we
debated endlessly and as I left he said to me, "you know your trouble
Annette?  You can't accept anything without proof.  Watch out you don't
always pivot around the starting point and never get close to the finish
line.  Take some things on faith to get started at least and then filter
it through as you go".

I thought he meant "blind faith", I mean the habit he wore seemed like a
dead giveaway, and I said, "no way!"  I wasted a lot of time by not
heeding those wise words.  I mean, if you never accept something to work
with and perhaps modify or maybe even reject later, you hardly get
started.  And then, when you've walked a distance with this principle as
a tool, surely you can have patience with those who say either "no way"
or "this way only".

So you present some photographs....someone will "prove" them fakes.  So
you cook up some fakes.....someone will "prove" them authentic.
It seems like a downward spiral to me.
Cheers
Annette

Dr. A.M.Bain wrote:
>
> Caldwell/Graye <blafoun@azstarnet.com> writes
> >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote:
> >
> >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great
> >> Brotherhood.  Testimony from others who could confirm from their own
> >> experience that what she said was also what they found.
> >
> >Daniel Caldwell replies:
> >
> >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame
> >Blavatsky's
> >lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers.  See my
> >article at:
>
> Mr. Caldwell:
>
> But no picture.  No doubt they said they had met HPB's "Adept"
> teachers, and I agree that Olcott definitely did (Old Diary Leaves).
> However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from
> independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another
> matter.
>
> As you have chosen to use the remainder of my post to lauch into yet
> another monologue on Paul Johnson's book, I am sure you will forgive
> me if I ignore it, along with your seemingly confrontatational style.
>
> Take it up with Paul, if you must, but I suspect that most of us are more
> than well-enough informed about your views on the matter.
>
> BTW, I have never met Jesus, nor wanted to.  Whether he existed is
> irrelevant to me.  Any teaching attributed to him is worth considering
> *on its merits* - as is also the case with HPB, "masters" or none.
>
> AB
> -------------
> A.M.Bain, D.D.
>
>