Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00045)

|-----Original Message-----
|From: leonmaurer@aol.com [mailto:leonmaurer@aol.com] 
|Sent: Saturday, 3 November 2001 6:20 AM
|To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
|Subject: Re: Theos-World time to review how theos-talk operates
|
|
|It's not surprising that you took my impersonal answer to your 
|question 
|personally. 

I'm sorry - I thought it was pretty much aimed at me coz' of all the
political stuff I've been posting. My mistake.


As usual, your statements, mostly disguised in 
|the form of self 
|justifying or snide questions, show a profound ignorance of 
|theosophy. 

Ummmm...no It's just a different MO. For example - I use 'pen-name'
because I don't wish to develop my ego. I'm not out to make a 'name for
myself'. A devil's advocate should remain objective. 

|"Character" is the higher nature of the real individuality 
|that overshadows 
|the "artificial construct" of the lower nature or *personality*. 

Sorry could you give me a page in ISIS for this so I canstudy upon it?

Each 
|individual is responsible for their own character and personality. To 
|"destroy" either one, belonging to someone else, is not the 
|prerogative of 
|those wishing to play God. 

I don't think that was the point though was it?


Such Hubris is one of the "seven 
|deadly sins" 
|leading to one's own bad karma. 'One must see to their own 
|faults before 
|they judge the faults of another' is the teaching of all the 
|great Masters of 
|Wisdom. Therefore, it behooves one to think before one speaks...
|
|LHM
|
|
|In a message dated 11/02/01 10:03:16 AM, nos@granite.net.au writes:
|
|>Character assassination? Isn't the character an artifical construct -
|>to destroy it not beneficial? ;)
|>
|>NOS

See that little winky emoticon just /\ there - that means nudge nudge
wink wink. 
I seriously thought that anyone that really knows anything knows that
everythings Maya and all this is just a big joke. Seriously.

Nos