Theos-Talk Archives (May 1999ar Message tt00111)

In a message dated 5/7/99 4:16:10 PM, schuelergerald@optec-hq.optec.army.mil 
writes:

<< >>When we can write a "SECRET DOCTRINE," then we might be entrusted to
make interpretative changes, but not till then.>>

>Although this statement is doubtless with good-intentions,
>it makes it very clear to me why no Messenger has been 
>recognized during this century. Nor will one ever be.>>

And certainly not yourself, I presume.  But, how about clearing it up for us 
"ignorant" students with some of your erudite knowledge or scientifically, 
philosophically and theosophically valid references that leads you to such a 
"clear" judgment.  

How do you know that others might or might not be in a position to do so, or 
could not even have done so already?  I know of several Secret Doctrine 
"interpretations" that "clearly" clarify what HPB said (as taught to her by 
the Masters) and in no way contradict the fundamental principles that 
theosophy bases ALL of it's its teachings upon.  Maybe you ought to read some 
more of the writing of WQJ and RC, or even the modern writings on 
reincarnation and karma by Joseph Head and Sylvia Cranston before making such 
opinionated judgments.  Besides, what basis do we need to judge whether 
anyone who has written an interpretation of theosophy--on some of the levels 
that HPB has said would only be evident to the "intuitive student--is NOT a 
direct "Messenger" of the Masters?  If you or any one of us does not 
recognize such teaching as their direct "message," can our "ignorance" or 
lack of intuition be the basis of such a judgment?  

I, for one--based on ALL of his writings, as well as a thorough knowledge of 
the scientific correlations in the Secret Doctrine--think that Einstein may 
have been such a "messenger."  The fact that he had no relationship with any 
theosophical organization, or even heard of Perucker, can in no way determine 
whether or not he had correctly interpreted the Secret Doctrine with his 
theory of relativity, his pioneering understanding of quantum physics, and 
his writings on peace, brotherhood, universal mind and consciousness, and 
other theosophical truisms--ALL revealed (if some parts are quite occult and 
obscure to most "non-intuitive" readers) in the SD.  It is very clear to me, 
therefore, that he intuited ALL of his scientific clarifications and moral 
"teachings" (that have radically "changed the minds of the race," or at least 
those of their scientific gurus) directly from the writings of HPB.  (See 
"HOW DID EINSTEIN INTUIT (GROK) E=MC^2?" at: 
http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html)  

Since any new messenger would have to reach the "minds of the race in the 
language of this age" with his/her new teachings or interpretations, why 
would such a one--especially one already in the public eye--choose to join 
ANY impotent and effete theosophical "organization" (as they mostly appear to 
be these days), or even use the word "theosophy" in their writings?  "A rose 
by any other name would still smell as sweet."

LHM


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.