Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00253)

Hi Brigitte and all of you,

Brigtitte wrote the below:

"plus Bailey 
> that according to at least some listmembers,is "light years ahead of 
> HPB", and Indries Shah that is
> acording to Sufilight at least is again light years ahead of all the 
> others and so on, all in fact are using similar sources that contain 
> the same eternal TRUTH and the same natural LAWS of Dallas of 
> course."

1. 
I didn't say that Brigitte ! A ask you: Please won't you keep the - truth - close to your heart.
It is your use of the word "again" in the above, which is very fake and wrong.

I hold HPB - and the wisdom one can get from her writings - physical, astral, and mental and higher ! - very near to my heart. 

2. 
And "all the others" - in the above who are they, and when did I mention them - together with Idries Shah ??
Please - please Brigitte be more precise in the future. 

3.
You are lying and attacking me at the same time, can you not se that ?? Please answer my question.
Sometimes one just feel, that you are pouring hate out. 

4. I give the word to Martin Luther King Jr. - to if possible calm you Brigitte :

"I think the first reason that we should love our enemies, and I think thisis at the very center of Jesus' thinking, is this: that hate for hate onlyintensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. If I hit you and you hit me and I hit you back and you hit me back and go on, you see, that goes on ad infinitum. It just never ends. Somewhere somebody must have alittle sense, and that's the strong person. The strong person is the person who can cut off the chain of hate, the chain of evil. And that is the tragedy of hate, that it doesn't cut it off. It only intensifies the existenceof hate and evil in the universe. Somebody must have religion enough and morality enough to cut it off, and inject within the very structure of the universe that strong and powerful element of love." 

Excerpted from "Loving Your Enemies", a sermon delivered on 17 November 1957 at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Ala. (full text) 

Try this: http://home1.stofanet.dk/global-teosophy/martin_luther_king_jr2.htm

"People who live with fragmented love, increasing hatredness and jealousy, will never be happy. Right from morning when you get up to the time you sleep in the evening, you should spend your time with love. " (from Sufilightswebsite)



Please Brigitte be sweet and kind. Please.
The good God - loves you. The bad God doesn't.
I care for you Brigitte. Do you care for me ?

from
Sufilight with LOVE...





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "bri_mue" <bri_mue@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 7:05 PM
Subject: Theos-World Daniel's "Chohan's" and "Nirmankaya's."


> There should also be no illusion about India where I travelled 
> twice including being involved with an archeological project but 
> also with various spiritual encounters. Its spiritual society  
> has encouraged in many cases the use of drugs while poverty, disease, 
> social discrimination and superstition reached one of its highest and 
> most organized forms in history. Reactions of this list have been 
> that "it takes one to know one", even I have never taken any
> drugs in my life, and have repeatedly expressed that spiritual 
> experiences don't need such, using this nevertheless maybe an 
> attempt to try silence me from telling the truth, wich obviously is 
> not going to work.
> 
> Lopsang Rampa or the founder of Eckankar, that according to Daniel 
> Caldwell's "4 step process of discovery" just aswell now can be 
> called "Chohan's" and "Nirmankaya's" in their own right, (plus Bailey 
> that according to at least some listmembers,is "light years ahead of 
> HPB", and Indries Shah that is
> acording to Sufilight at least is again light years ahead of all the 
> others and so on, all in fact are using similar sources that contain 
> the same eternal TRUTH and the same natural LAWS of Dallas of 
> course.
> 
> The Theosophical Glossary, published in 1892, contains an 
> alphabetical arrangement of words and terms pertaining to occultism 
> and theosophy, as Coleman confirmed by others wrote: "The 
> fabrications of Madame Blavatsky scattered through it, was copied 
> from other books. The explanations and definitions of 425 names and 
> terms were copied from Dowson's Hindu Classical Dictionary. From 
> Wilson's Vishnu Purana were taken those of 242 terms; from
> Eitel's Handbook of Chinese Buddhism, 179; and from Mackenzie's 
> Masonic Cyclopaedia, 164.
> 
> A modicum of credit was given to these four books in the preface. 
> But, inasmuch as, scattered through the Glossary, credit was given at 
> intervals to these books for a certain few of the passages extracted 
> therefrom, its readers might easily be misled, by the remark in the 
> preface relative to these four books, into the belief that said 
> remark was intended to cover the various passages in the Glossary 
> where these books are named as the sources whence they were derived 
> and these alone, that the passages duly credited to said books 
> comprised the whole of the matter in the volume taken from them, 
> instead of being but a small part of the immense collection of matter 
> transferred en masse to the Glossary. But the four named in the 
> preface are not the only books thus utilised. A glossary of Sanskrit 
> and occultic terms was appended to a work called Five Years of 
> Theosophy, published by Mohini M. Chatterji in 1885.
> 
> At least 229 of these terms and their definitions were copied in 
> Blavatsky's Glossary, nearly verbatim in every instance; and no 
> credit whatever was given for this wholesale appropriation of 
> another's work. I cannot find a single reference to Chatterji's 
> glossary in any part of the later Glossary. Nearly all of the matter 
> concerning Egyptian mythology, etc., in the latter, was copied from 
> Bonwick's Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought. A small part of this 
> was credited, but over 100 passages from Bonwick were not credited. 
> Nearly every word in relation to Norse and Teutonic mythology was 
> copied from Wagner's Asgard and the Gods, a little being credited, 
> and some 100 passages not.
> 
> Most of the Thibetan matter was taken from Schlagintweit's 
> Buddhism in Thibet, some credited, but nearly 50 passages were not. 
> Much of the material anent Southern Buddhism was copied from Spence 
> Hardy's Eastern Monachism, nearly 50 passages being uncredited. 
> 
> Most of the Babylonian and Chaldean material was extracted from 
> Smith's Chaldean Account of Genesis, with nearly 50 passages not 
> credited. The Parsi and Zoroastrian matter was from Darmesteter's 
> translation of the Zend-Avesta, and West's translation of the 
> Bundahish in the Sacred Books of the East, mostly uncredited. Among 
> other books levied upon in the compilation of the Glossary, 
> principally with no credit given, are these: Sayce's Hibbert
> Lectures Myer's Qabbala, Hartmann's Paracelsus, Crawford's
> translation of the Kalevala, King's Gnostics, Faber's Cabiri, Beal's 
> Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, Rhys Davids's Buddhism, Edkins's 
> Chinese Buddhism, Maspero's Guide au Musee de Boulaq, Subba Row's 
> Notes on the Bhagavad Gita, Kenealy's Book of God, Eliphas Levi's 
> Works, and various others.
> 
> The Rampa books, and inventions like Daniel Caldwell's 
> Blavatsky/Chohan of a "secret "Tibet furnish proof that
> there is and has been a public appetite for "occultist" fantasies. 
> No doubt the image of Tibet in the West has as much, or more, to do 
> with deep seated fears and fantasies in the European and American  
> psyche, as with the realities of Tibetan history and culture. As 
> Ursula Bernis has put it:
> 
> "Tibet evoked a longing for purity of spirit and perfection.
> Images of Tibet answered our need for otherness to speak to us in 
> terms of spiritual authenticity. Tibet became ours in a very profound 
> way. We internalized the vast, forbidding, inaccessible, mysterious 
> spaces of Tibet described by early travelers. They became the hidden 
> domain of a collective spiritual depth-dimension filled with our 
> soul's innermost yearnings. Always withdrawing from ordinary gaze, 
> Tibet's uniqueness today serves the basic human craving for meaning 
> on levels other than the material"( "Tibet in the Shadow of Our
> Imagination", Parabola 22:3, August 1997,p. 84.)
> 
> "Tibet" has variously been constructed as a dark realm of 
> superstition, sorcery and decadent Buddhism, and as a never-never 
> land realm peopled by childlike peasants of simple piety and by monks 
> of fabulous psychic powers. Sometimes the two streams of European 
> fantasy commingle in the same site, producing those peculiar 
> ambivalences which mark much of the Western literature, especially in 
> the 19th century. Doubtless, too, a sentimental romanticism has 
> obscured the material particularities of Tibetan history. The 
> processes of mythologizing can indeed often be accommodated in recent 
> models of Orientalism, such as that intimated by Gustavo Benavides 
> when he writes, "Orientalism could... serve as a conduit through 
> which Western elites could replenish their ideological arsenal by 
> employing representations that because of their spatial, temporal, 
> and even ontological otherness could function as utopian horizons" 
> (120). Furthermore, we may in some measure agree with Lopez when he 
> argues that the Western romance of "Tibet" may actually be harmful to 
> the current Tibetan cause: (Gustavo Benavides, "Giuseppe Tucci, or 
> Buddhology" in "Curators of the Buddha",p. 181)
> 
> Fantasies of Tibet have in the past three decades inspired much 
> support for the cause of Tibetan independence. But those fantasies 
> are ultimately a threat to the realization of that goal. It is not 
> simply that learning that Tibet was not the place we dreamed it to be 
> might result in some "disillusionment". It is rather that to allow 
> Tibet to circulate as a constituent in a system of fantastic 
> oppositions... is to deny Tibet its history, to exclude Tibet from 
> the real world of which it has always been a part, and to deny 
> Tibetans their role as agents participating in the creation of a 
> contested reality, and the same is my argument for a sincere 
> biographical look at the real Helena P. Blavatskaya, instead of the 
> imaginatid "HPB" wich some Theosophists simple use to
> pave their personal, equally imagined road to salvation with.
> 
> Donald Lopez whom I mentioned before does us a useful service in 
> dismantling and qualifying some of the more persistent popular 
> stereotypes about Tibet as a "timeless" culture, as an Edenic 
> paradise, as a static polity etc but in so doing he somethimes also 
> seems to surrender to a danger of which he is intermittently aware, 
> that of reducing Tibet to a vacuum filled by nothing more than 
> the "ideological fictions" of the West. (Lopez, "New Age 
> Orientalism"p. 43. See also Lopez's comments on what he calls "the 
> demonisation of China" which he sees as "yet a further manifestation 
> of the continuing orientalist romance of Tibet" in "Curators of
> the Buddha",p. 292-293.).
> 
> Many of these developments are also discussed in the most recent 
> edition of the well known and recommended book "How the Swans
> Came to the Lake".
>  
> Bri.
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>