Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00378)

May 31, 2000

Dear Scotty:

I'll put some notes in yours below.

May be this will prove useful, I hope

Dal


D. T. B.


========================================

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com
[mailto:owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com]On Behalf Of scott
holloman
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 10:53 PM
To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Several Comments on Alice Bailey

As usual I agree with ya Dallas. I have agreed with almost all
your
views. I am not learned or claim to be wise but I do know
intelligence
does not = wisdom. Research is good but of course we are talkin
about
quality of quantity. Disagreements arise and often I fall back on
intuition(however faulty)

------------------
DTB	Excellent to use the INTUITION and then check it with the
mind and such facts or references as we can find.  And that takes
a bit of work.  Intuition should always be cross checked as it
sometimes mixes with "fancy" and it is difficult to clearly
distinguish the two.
========================
References are references and can be out of
context unfortunately. Picking apart a written work is scary to
me.How
can I truly paraphrase what some one really mean't even if I had
the
pleasure of knowing them personally. It is my habit to take what
wisdom I
can from works and go from there (part of my journey; my way,
however
unwise). Is a particular work filled with symbolism or is it
meant to be
taken literally? Is it both?          friends,Scotty
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-

DTB	Symbolism if not explained and clear to the intuition and the
mind is a kind of trap.
WE, the REAL WE, use the mind as a tool and logic as a
task-master in that usage. What I mean is that the Mind gives us
our independence.  But it also links us with the two extremes of
WISDOM and ignorance and fancy. Being in between our present task
is to find out that which is of PERMANENT VALUE.  Some call it
TRUTH.  Or  FACT.
In my view, we cannot waffle about that.  A thing is useful or
not, true, or not.  And we have at present the task, the job, of
FINDING OUT.  So let us do what we can from where we are, and
with what we have of experience, but let us also recall that we
are as mighty as the mightiest, because our SOURCE is the same as
theirs.

The ONE SPIRIT is everywhere and in everything.  We see some of
the shadowy coverings of the truths that lie concealed -- but
which open to our mind's probe.  So we ought not to undervalue
ourselves, ever.

We may feel inexperienced, but that is eventually bridged by
study and persistence in that. The idea and the word TRY are
placed before us as a guide. This kind of inspiration you will
find in the VOICE OF THE SILENCE, or in the BHAGAVAD GITA.
So symbols are everywhere.  But if you want to be very definite
as to their use and value why not go to Mr. Judge's articles on
that subject ?
THEOSOPHICAL SYMBOLS  Vol. I,  WQJ Articles, pp 586, 592
Best wishes,

Dallas

=================================





dalval2nwc.net wrote:
>
> Dear Friends:
>
> Of what possible use is "ranking ?"
>
> Who wants to feel superior to whom ? Why?
>
> We have all the trouble in the world managing our own lower
> nature to be curious about the struggles or the successes of
> others -- those are all SIDE ISSUES and if anything, they
relate
> solely to the individuals themselves and are not up for
scrutiny
> for anyone else save one's INNER MASTER.  This has nothing to
do
> with the PRINCIPLES or the PROGRESS of the HUMAN EGO through
its
> many incarnations.  It is sheer nonsense to believe that this
is
> at all significant.  However if one wants to play with toys,
then
> let's go to the real children and cease making Theosophical
sand
> castles.  Or am I totally wrong in this ?
>
> Any writing or attention paid to this is way outside the
purview
> of ORIGINAL THEOSOPHY.  Can you find HPB (or the Masters)
wasting
> and time  at all on such things ?
>
> Please -- if this be theosophy (which it is not) then save me
> from it.
>
> Dallas
>
> D. T. B.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com
> [mailto:owner-theos-talk@theosophy.com]On Behalf Of Dennis Kier
> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 9:52 PM
> To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Several Comments on Alice Bailey
>
> >     On the other hand, Creme has indicated that the point of
> evolution for
> > Blavatsky was 4.0 .
>
> Mr. Leadbeater also had a system of ranking people according to
> their
> spiritual progress. Is this what Creme is using?
>
> >     Finally, Benjamin Creme claims that he is in telepathic
> rapport, like
> > Bailey and Blavatsky, with one of the Senior Members of the
> Hierarchy, a
> > Master whose name is not to be released at this time, but
soon.
> That is
> > the source of his information. His further claim is that it
is
> Maitreya,
> > and following that the Hierarchy (including the Master
Jesus),
> which is
> > externalizing at this time.  The evidence seems fairly
> convincing and
> > should, I think, be looked at honestly and critically in its
> own light.
>
> I am pretty sure that he had a center in North Hollywood about
10
> years ago,
> and the claims made then are just about the same as I  am
seeing
> again here.
>
> I was under the impression then that the "externalization"
would
> take place
> shortly. Shortly has come and gone.
>
> It is common to note in Spiritualist circles that one class of
> spirit will
> try to flatter the mediumistic person by telling them of the
> spiritual
> wonders that they will accomplish, and that they were specially
> chosen for
> this mission, until they start taking orders from the spirit,
> after which
> their life will go downhill fast. Mr. Creme has been doing this
> longer than
> most mediums last under the influence.
>
> I have problems with the slow progress of this Externalization,
> if any is to
> take place. Has Creme been predicting when this EXT. will take
> place? Do you
> get the impression it will be before the next 12 years will
pass?
> When I was
> reading the magazine 10 years ago, I am pretty sure that they
had
> a date
> fixed for it to happen, and that that date came and went 8 to
10
> years ago.
>
> There are a lot of people interested in these things. There are
> enough that
> people can constantly come, get aquainted, and then after 2 or
3
> years,
> leave again, that the orgainzation can live on for years.
>
> -- 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.
>
> -- 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.

-- 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.


-- 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.