Re: Theos-World New Messengers Have to Write Their Own SD
May 16, 1999 01:13 AM
by LeonMaurer
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.
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application