Theos-Talk Archives (April 2000 Message tt00049)

In a message dated 04/16/00 3:00:02 AM, ringding@blinx.de writes:

>O no, not again that idiotic pseudo-scientific and pseudo-
>theosophical fairy tale book.
>
>If the University of Vienna calls on their web-site this really 
>an "scientific" book we first have to talk about what is Science.
>
>Frank

Oh no, not again... Another idiotic prejudgement based on nothing more than 
rumors -- that attempt to denigrate theosophy without any knowledge of what 
it really teaches.  Shades of the 1890s British Psychical Society, and the 
other "Luddites" prior to that time -- and afterwards. 

The teachings of theosophy have to be taken on their own thoroughly 
understood merits...  And, no research (valid or not) by historical scholars, 
attempting to prove or disprove the truth or falsity of HPB's claims about 
her association with "Masters of Wisdom" has any value in that respect. 

Perhaps you ought to read the Mission Statement as well as the history of the 
University of Vienna before doubting its authority as one of the foremost 
world class centers of scientific teachings and religious philosophies.  See: 
< http://www.univie.ac.at/unileitbildengl.html >  and 
< http://www.univie.ac.at/Ausseninstitut/unigb1.htm >

So, before taking such a no-nothing, prejudicial attitude, If you doubt the 
scientific validity of the fundamental teachings of theosophy as presented in 
the Secret Doctrine, you (and other skeptics and doubting Thomas's) would be 
wise to first check out the web site at:
<http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstein.html> 
-- and find out what Einstein scientifically "intuited" from the teachings in 
those volumes. Even Einstein was considered a fraud and a fantasizer by 
classical scientists when he first came up with his special theory of 
relativity and the unproven (until the late 30's) E=mc^2 in 1905.  

Then, you might also read (actually, study and consider) the SD -- as a 
physics textbook (as Einstein did) -- which presages, and reveals the 
fundamental basis of ALL *proven* modern scientific theories of physics 
(relativity, photoelectricity, quantum, and quark theories) PLUS the recent 
postmodern cosmological physics (Superstring, Membrane, and Zero point energy 
[ZPE] theories).  All of which cyclically (not psychically) rests on the 
"Fundamental Principles" along with the "Laya point" of HPB, or the 
scientific "zero point instant" postulated by modern and post modern science. 
 Then, perhaps, we all might have some respect for your (and other 
denigrating "pundits" who, obliquely, discredit the teachers to disqualify 
the teachings) *well considered* and unbiased opinions about the theosophical 
scientific teachings, themselves. (*–-* = italics)  You might also read my 
ABC paper and associated diagrams (web sites below) that postulates a new 
scientific paradigm of holographic coenergetic fields that correlates 
theosophy with modern string and zero-point energy theories (recently proven 
to exist by the Casimir Effect as well as the split photon "action at a 
distance" entanglement experiments at CERN)). After such study, you might be 
more qualified to make valid judgments based on acquired knowledge, rather 
than ignorance that rests on questionable historical evidence (food for 
ignorant skeptics) regarding the personalities of the "founders" and their 
associates. 

The project noted below could possibly be a worthwhile endeavor to clarify 
the history of theosophy -- provided it refers back to its origination in 
ancient Greece under the auspices of the Neo Platonists, Ammonius Saccus, 
Porphyry and Plotinus. (See the *Key to Theosophy* by HPB).  And, provided it 
rests on a serious study of their teachings as later correlated with the 
*Book of Dzyan* by H. P.  Blavatsky in her seminal book, *The Secret Doctrine 
- The Synthesis of  Science, Religion and Philosophy*.  This book and it's 
teachings should be the only basis upon which to judge the truth or falsehood 
of the scientific basis of theosophy... Not, on whether or not the so called 
"Masters" were pseudonymous personalities -- for which there is no valid hard 
evidence, either pro or con.  Also, HPB's personality and her unproved, so 
called "frauds," based on questionable historical research, should have no 
relevance whatsoever to the scientific validity of the teachings presented in 
the Secret Doctrine, or in her other occult writings -- which must either 
stand or fall on their own logic and reasonableness, as well as on (HPB's 
predicted) modern scientific corroboration.  In any case, HPB cannot be 
blamed for her possible dissemblinng to avoid violating certain oaths of 
secrecy regarding the esoteric occult imformation transmitted to her by the 
Masters (who might also have required a certain degree of anonymity).  In 
addition, why would HPB have intentionally blinded certain dangerous occult 
teachings in the SD by leaving them to be "dug out" by her more intuitive 
students with a level of intelligence. ethics and scientific/mathematical 
knowledge close to that of Einstein?

>> There is a call for papers for a new website on the early 
>> history of the T.S. and the Masters. There will be
>> monthly interviews and it starts today with K. Paul Johnson.
>>
>> The website is titled:
>>
>> HISTORY OF THEOSOPHY
>> http://www.unet.univie.ac.at/~a7502210/
>>
>> "These Webpages are to bring together academic and 
>> semi academic research related to the early history of the 
>> Theosophical Society, its surroundings and legacy."

Without reference to the above mentioned historical review, but with 
reference to modern and post modern science, I hopefully await some 
intelligent discussions in these theosophical forums related to the 
fundamental scientific principles that underlies all evolution, as well as 
the scientific relationships between spirit, mind and matter -- as presented 
in the SD and other writings of HPB and her (pseudonymous or not) Masters KH 
and M -- and supplemented by other corroborative writings of William Q. 
Judge, under their direct tutelage.  How else can the principles and ethics 
of theosophy, and the reasonableness of karma and reincarnation, be 
disseminated to and understood by ordinary people in "the language of THIS 
age"?  Anything else is just worthless gossip and babbling -- signifying 
nothing -- except to philologists and historians -- whom all true 
theosophists can take with a "grain of salt."

LHM
leonmaurer@aol.com
http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html

"To prejudge without serious study and thought is to be blind to the truth or 
falsity of any scientific, philosophical or religious doctrine" -- Thomas 
Aquinas

-- 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.