Theos-Talk Archives (March 2002 Message tt00045)

Dear Brigitte,

I wonder, in view of your often-expressed opinion that the Masters do 
not even exist, what you would consider proof of the identitiy of one 
particular Master? Are you perhaps hoping to find some reason to 
believe They exist too? This proof can only be found in one's own 
heart. Nobody can convince anyone of Their existence, nor is there 
any need to. If you know They exist, you know it. And if you doubt 
They exist, you will not find any proof that you are wrong in 
anything anyone can say. Your doubt itself prevents it. 

If you wish to know that the Masters exist, you have to prepare a 
place in your own heart to receive their help. This is done by trying 
to live according to the laws of nature, with renunciation of lower 
ego, loving our fellow man more than ourselves, letting go of 
attatchment to the results of our actions, accepting responsibility 
for our every thought, word and deed. It is not necessary to be 
perfect in these endeavors, but only to try and never give up. 

Adelasie

On 2 Mar 2002 at 1:48, bri_mue wrote:

> How do you know your "believe," Roerich is really
> "channeling" something like "Morya" or just "believe" this
> because the name sounds similar to what Blavatsky named what she
> tought she was dealing with, it must be that same "Morya" ?
> 
> If not just self-delusion, can you pls bring specific quotes
> compairing the writing style of the two versions of "Morya" showing it
> is the same as Blavatsky's. 
> 
> And concrete evidence that this was not just Roerichs fantasy, 
> subcounsciouly imitating the notion "Morya".
> 
> What evidence is there apart from a presumed claim by you 
> regarding "intuition" reg. which there is no, indication it could
> not be simple just disguised intellectual-emotional preferrence of
> yours ?
> 
> 
> Bri.