Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00114)

Wednesday, February 06, 2002

Dear Bill:

Don't mistake me, or what I say for the whole of what is named
THEOSOPHY. I only know a little of it, and what I have tested
seems to make good sense as a life-guide. But then that is not
universal, and I can only speak for myself. I have been doing
this for several years on the Internet now.

I do not care for "labels," they are inaccurate. The laws and
practice of brotherhood, decency, respect, friendliness, and a
strict regard for truth and sincerity, are what I strive for, and
are my goals. I appreciate them when any one voices them.

I have also written Dan Caldwell on this subject so you could
read that also, and employ what is said by me there as a part
answer to what you ask. We need not exaggerate anything. Nor
need we pretend to be anything we are not.

If we can practice ideals instead of merely speaking of, or
debating them, we will all be better in our conjoint lives. Let
the truth prevail.

Please note that mine is a response to that which was written by
some others. I do not agree with everything. I seek for
principles we can all use, and I have repeatedly asked for them.

Theosophy has helped me greatly. I consider H P B and the
Mahatmas who stand behind her, as my TEACHERS, and I say so
openly and also rise to defend them and their philosophy. I have
so far discovered nothing better, and I have looked far and wide.
So why should I not act as a champion (self appointed) or a
"protector" to use your word ? I do not feel in any way demeaned
by the concept, do you ?

In return, and in gratitude, I uphold that which I sense that
Theosophy represents to us all, as a view of the universe and its
cooperative functionings. In this I agree, and proclaim that
science, philosophy, ethics, morals, and the urge to live a
spiritual life are merged, and form a unified whole. There is a
spiritual universe as well as a psychic, an intellectual and a
physical one; and the laws of all Nature, of which Karma is the
grandest, frame and enclose it. Otherwise we could not (as
immortals) all be here. But, I also recognize others may not see
it that way.

I sometimes wonder if the study of Theosophy cannot be prosecuted
more vigorously by us all? There are things of great value in
it, and practical ones we can all use in our daily lives. As far
as I can see it has active antagonism to nothing. Neither do I.
But misrepresentation deserves attention so as to readjust and
set things straight, if possible. If I keep silent, then I
tacitly agree to things said that I sense are either unfair or
untrue.

I can only say what I sense and feel -- as Dallas.

A sad disgust expresses it. In French the word "gout" means
taste. "Disgust" to me is distasteful.

I am quite honest (I hope) about what I say, but not always
wise.

Best wishes,


Dallas

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Meredith [mailto:bilmer@surfsouth.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 7:06 PM
To: Theosophy Study List
Subject: Fw: Theos-World how does theosophy explain 'disgust'?



Thank you for your candid response. May I also be so candid?
>
----- Original Message -----
> From: <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: "Theosophy Study List" <theos-l@list.vnet.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: Theos-World how does theosophy explain 'disgust'?


Tuesday, February 05, 2002

<Dear Bill:

I offer you my opinion: Yes, I am disgusted.>

Is this disgust something that you take pride in? Is it a
feeling that you
recommend I cultivate an appetite for as well? Shall I be
disgusted at the
same things and people as you or may I have a choice? My
central question
is whether Theosophy, as you understand it, allows for, or
possibly even
demands that we adopt a posture of disgust with those people and
ideas that
oppose it. You, of all people on this list, are most inclined
to
continually offer what Theosophy is and Theosophy says as
'proof' of
something. I ask you again. What does Theosophy, as you
understand it,
say
about 'disgust'? And I ask again, if your disgust is at ideas
contained in
e-mails, or the people who write such e-mails?


< As I understand it this group was established to discuss
Theosophy, and not the character of people associated with it.>

As I understand it this group was established to discuss
theosophy with a
small t. The particular brand of theosophy that you give your
allegiance
to
is discussed most effectively on the BN lists, where moderator's
keep
'students' from straying too far from the established doctrines.
I also am
quite certain that you have no problem with discussing the
character of
people associated with theosophy, so long as the discussion
proceeds along
the lines that you have come to accept as representative of the
true
character of the people associated with it. I mean if Adelasie
characterizes HPB as a saint, do you have a problem with that?

< And certainly not to have character association served up
daily.
This is undignified.>

Yes it is extremely undignified. It is more so when the one
doing the
character association (I assume you mean assassination) seems so
unaware of
his actions. I quote you again: "I have not been reading fully
the posts
by Brigitte or Paul Johnson -- they disgust me." Dallas, can
you not see
that your words reflect that characteristic which you despise
most in your
'enemy'?


< People who write history and expect respect, of the kind that
gives stature to a writer for perhaps the next 100 years, do not
reopen exploded slanders settled and disposed of a 100 years
ago,
unless some overlooked novelty has emerged. I am annoyed, and
frankly, disgusted by the jejune and baseless beating of "dead
horses.">


Yes, I know you are. My question is why? Do you see yourself
as a
'protector' of some previously agreed upon truth? Is it
possible that the
horse is not so dead as you think? Possible, but not probable,
as Daniel
would say?
The horse may be a decaying carcass to you, but it may be a high
spirited
thorough bred challenging ride to others.

<In cases where I find no "level field" is provided, I protest
in
the name of fairness to all. Both sides of any issue need
exposure to provide balance, and fairness. That is appreciated,
recognized, and provides dignity and stature.>


I accept that you actually believe that you are promoting a
level field
that
recognizes and appreciates balance and fairness to all. Some of
your words
say different.
You promote disgust for those who openly oppose your
understanding of
truth.
You promote ignoring that which disagrees with your precepts.
You promote
an "us against them" condition which is an artificial construct
of your own
intellect. You could choose to respond in a different manner,
but you
don't.

< If any one wants to ascertain if there is validity in
THEOSOPHY,
let them study it as a philosophy, as an hypothesis concerning
the formation of the Universe and our world, on the nature of
man
as an intelligence, on universal purposiveness, and the reason
for our being here, and then, report on their findings, or raise
questions.>


What does theosophy say is our reason for being here?
Why has this current incarnation brought us all together in this
cyber
format? Why are you and me and the KPJs and Brigittes of the
world
attracted to each other? Have they been with us from life to
life. Why?
Of course Karma is a word that proposes to explain why, but
really only
offers a theory on how. Why Dallas? You are older and wiser
than me. Why
do the e-mails from Paul Johnson and Mauri show up on your
computer screen
day after day? If they disgust you, why haven't you blocked
them? Is it
possible that you secretly enjoy the 'fight' to preserve HPB's
rendition of
theosophy?

<For instance, here are some subjects being currently discussed
and which others, and I, have been seeking answers for:

Is there actual immortality? Is it possible this is in
"invisible Nature and invisible Man ?"
Do Law and Laws rule the Universe?
Is there any Goal for evolution?
What is the power of thought? How is it developed? Where does
it lead?
Is a single life adequate to learn all that can be known about
our environment, ourselves and our potential future?
Who (or what) runs the world and our Universe? Are we
privileged
to inquire into that ?
What are the limits of Space?
What are the ultimate divisions of Time?
Is eternity a fact or just a "very long time?"
How is Consciousness to be defined?
Is Universal Brotherhood a fact in nature or only a wispy dream?
Why study other religions and sciences?
Where is the research of human endeavor recorded?
Who keeps those records?>


Sorry Dallas, but this is not a list of questions. Rather it is
a list of
prompts for canned Theosophical (big T) responses, that you have
on file at
your fingertips. I have read them all over the last few years.
They are
good and useful, but they are not the alpha and omega. Like
Jerry, I am
not in your camp or that of your enemy. Like Mauri, I am trying
to read
your e-mails as somehow possibly being Karmically designed just
for me.
Also KPJ's and Brigittes and Sufilights. With that thought in
mind, I look
forward to your next response.

<That will be of interest to most of us, I believe.

Best wishes,>

Yes, best wishes. But more than that, best designs.

Bill
<Dallas>



---
You are currently subscribed to theos-l as:
dalval14@earthlink.net
List URL - http://list.vnet.net/?enter=theos-l
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
leave-theos-l-14759P@list.vnet.net