Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00084)

Hi Brian. You seem to me like an interesting and intelligent person in many
ways, but in the way you are approaching this topic, I believe you could use
a little more discrimination. People will believe in all kinds of things.
They will often do this seemingly arbitrarily, but behind this, of course,
is a dynamic. Unless you come to understand the dynamic, you will
perpetually be pouring from the empty into the void. Is this how you want to
live your life? Is this sensible or meaningful? Think this over.

As people, we are suggestible. There is a tendency to eternalize situations
and to want to believe this or that. There is a somewhat grave situation,
both politically and environmentally, on the planet earth, would you not
agree, but most people ARBITRARY believe they do not need to address this
problem "till tomorrow." Is this not true? I do this myself. You probably
do, too.

Rule #1: Do not try to take anything away from someone unless you are able
to help them find something better to replace it with. You think you have
something better, reality and common sense, and I would agree, it probably
is better, but telling this is not enough. You need to SHOW it. You do not
say, "trust me. There is a reality which is better. Give up your belief and
then it will be there." This is what the wolf says to the chicken before he
eats it. No one will listen, and they should not, as to them, IT MAKES NO
SENSE, even though it does make sense to you.

I do not care if Madame Blavatsky tricked people. If she did, I think it is
funny. Why do you care? HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO FIND OUT? The point I
personally would be interested in making is that it is not necessary to
look back. You would think this is a point everyone of us understands, but
we don't. Even I am looking back on irrelevant details the moment before I
bump into a telephone pole.

Yes, there are many more Mormons than Theosophists. This is the fastest
growing religion on the planet earth. Joseph Smith did not need to provide
evidence of a certain nature, not does any one who is interested in
attracting a bunch of believers. You do not need to have evidence to
believe. What is your point? I suspect you are angry. Would you be angry at
a five year old for believing in the Easter bunny? I am not being sarcastic
when I say that this principle is very hard to understand,when applied to
adults, but it is not only valid but of prime importance. If you and I
understand this (and I am still struggling to understand and apply this in
my everyday life), we can turn our intelligence and energy to projects that
have more of a likelihood of succeeding, and in this way, maybe we can help
many people. Sincerely, Wry

----- Original Message -----
From: "brianmuehlbach" <brianmuehlbach@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 5:20 AM
Subject: Theos-World The "sources" of the letters, and the "staging" of
Blavatsky's "Masters."


> Wry: Joseph Smith, or whatever his name was, found the Book
> of Mormon on tablets of pure gold which he dug up in the ground. To
> me this is ridiculous.
>
> Brian: There are indeed many more believing Mormons then people
> believe the "Mahatma Letters" have been created out of tin air, as Daniel
> Caldwell and Dallas/Dalval keep suggesting.
>
> Like Smith and the Golden Tablets, Blavatsky did not provide
> documentary or other real evidence for her sources. Including that there
> are no reliable reports of someone for example having seen any of the
> so called "Mahatmas" while writing any of these letters.
>
> Instead we do have reports like that Hume and Sinnett at first didn`t feel
> that the letters met with the standards of a Master. In the place of
> answers to their metaphysical questions they received constant
> injunctions to be kind and understanding to HPB. "You can hardly be too
> indulgent with her," Mahatma Koot Hoomi told them, and for a while
> they obeyed him.
>
> The Mahatma Letters played with notions of their own fictitiousness in
> sophisticated ways, calling attention to the Mahatmas` status as
> inventive inventions: having been "`invented` ourselves," the Masters
> noted, they "repay the inventors by inventing" increasingly
> complicated "imaginary" doctrines as a way of avoiding accusations of
> inconsistency or internal contradiction in their teachings. (KH to Sinnet,
> Letter No. 24B)
>
> Distressed by Blavatskys intermediary role in the communications, Hume
> and Sinnet decided to send a letter to the "Maha Chohan," another
> Master, asking to correspond directly without the meddling hand of
> Blavatsky. Giving the sealed letter to Blavatsky for forwarding as usual.
> She retired to her room with it, supposedly intending to play the piano
> while magically precipitating the envelope to its destination, but a very
> different kind of music was heard from the room a few minutes later,
> when she emerged screaming betrayal and treason, having opened the
> letter and read it.
>
> See also: http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/mhoax.html
>
>
Brian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>