Theos-Talk Archives (August 2002 Message tt00036)

Hi Leon and all,

Here is a view to consider:

I few days back I wrote the following, which is an excerpt, in an email here at theos-talk:
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/7441)


"Q: But surely there is a system?

A: You do not know what a 'system' is. The work is really systematised at a
level much higher than intellect as you know it. Any apparent systematisation
is merely a working frame, concocted for the purpose of bringing the teaching a
little nearer to you. It does not have universal validity. The system is known
by the teacher and equally developed people, just as you know something so well
that you act in accordance with it inevitably. This work is natural, organic
and changes form, not content, in accordance with the needs of the people, the
work and the teacher. What serves as a system in one phase of the work is not a
system in another."

The work is of course spiritual. It is ongoing right now. It is covering cosmos as a whole.
It is imense and also beyond ordinary or lower thoughts.
Let us stay tuned for Cosmic Consciousness.
Why deny your self and others wisdom ?

The saying goes: The initiated walks in the world, but is not of the world.
On could say that to ParaBrahman or the Initiated "the Fundamental principles" is only an inferior or lower kind. To to base ones view ONLY on these "Fundamental principles" - would certianly be wrong OR of a lower level.
Let us transcend time and space and see truth as it really is.

Nothing highlights the non-spiritual but very social character of many relationships so much as the need for contact, association, relationship. People feel that they should be near someone of sanctity; and that they should impart their bleesing to others; that some sort of frequent or constant contact has some spiritual dimension.

The fact is, of course, that there are times and places where it is more important for people with mutual spiritual interests to be apart rather thantogehter. Those who understand this and have experienced it are the spiritual people. Those who have not, are part of a sociological phenomenon: herding.
The origin of this desire to herd together is not far to seek. Those who lead the herding are inadequate: they feel doubts and discomfort when they are not in contact with like-minded people. Those who flock at the behest ofthe 'herders' are equally inadequate. But, in their case, there is more hope - that they can be taken to a position where they no longer have to be dependent upon others; where their inadequacy is cured, rather than being reaffirmed by herding.

To be social in an organisation with certain so-called core-teachings, which quite often bases the social behavoir mainly on emotions - is only an activity of a limited kind.
A great number of so-called spiritual organisations or some of their branches of today only reaches the level I tend to call "Tee, talk and emotional feelings". 
 
from 
M. Sufilight with happy eeh...motions...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Does Theosophy Have Core Doctrines?


> 
> In a message dated 08/03/02 12:29:18 AM, bartl@sprynet.com (Bart Lidofsky) 
> writes:
> 
> >leonmaurer@aol.com wrote:
> >> Theosophy has logically unassailable "fundamental principles" or 
> propositions
> >
> > The Sufi's and Kabballists might disagree with you.
> 
> How so? In my experience, I have met Kabbalists and Sufis that disagree with 
> each other as well as with Theosophists on a number of interpretive levels.  
> But, I never heard of any logical disagreement on "fundamental principles." 
> 
> So, in your view, which one or more of the three theosophical propositions 
> might they disagree with? Do they disagree with the Absolute, ineffable, 
> divine origin of all "life" in the Cosmos? Do they disagree with the 
> fundamental laws of cycles and periodicity? Do they disagree with the 
> experiential purpose and evolution of Man's spiritual soul through all the 
> kingdoms of nature to eventually return to the universal Spirit or Godhead? 
> 
> And, if there is such a disagreement -- would you kindly explain what arethe 
> "fundamental principles" or "truths" that they base their teachings on?  
> 
> LHM
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>