Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00145)

Hi Brian and all of you,

This is just too much. I had to laugh a little while reading the below email
from Brian.

Brian wrote in the below:
"THAT THERE IS NOTHING IN THOSE LETTERS, WHICH COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN PENNED BY HPB AND HER EDUCATED COHORTS. NOTHING.
THE 'WISDOM' IN THEM IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE
AND VISION, POSSESSED AND SEEN BY ANCIENT BEINGS OR AGELESS
BEINGS OUTSIDE OF TIME. IT IS THE INFORMATION / KNOWLEDGE
BASE OF PERSONS WITH A DISTINCT TIME-LIMITED FRAME OF
REFERENCE.

My Sufilight remarks and questions:
Well, that is a view. And it is of course allright to a have a view and
present it.
But you will then have to admit, that YOU today are NOT having a GREAT
amount of Wisdom.
Do you not agree on that ?
So I have to ask where is the solid rock of assurance, we the readers will
have to 'build' on - if we want to agree with you ???

Should we all not seek knowledge from those who are wise - or at least seek
wisdom ?
Or should we listen to the first and best (- i.e. for instance YOU) who just
shouts LIARS, IDIOTS etc - and then in reality NOTHING else.
The above mesage of yours has as such (in a certain sense) NO Wisdom behind
it at all. Were-as some of the Mahatma Letters are talking about things,
which if - you - really experienced them your self - would I think make your
pretty head spin !
What do you know about the word "wisdom" or the words "true wisdom" ? Have
you ever experienced what true wisdom is ? Do you really think, that what we
humans ordinarily call "the reality" only contains - intellectual thinking
etc. ?
If so, I will have to say I certainly disagree - because my daily
experiences tells me something else.

Now of course true "Wisdom" is knowledge or insight of a kind. Some calls
it "Prophetic Gifts".
And because of that - the posibility of using it AND also misusing it comes
to mind. But think carefully about it.
Would it be wise to mis-use true wisdom ? It don't think so !
Because if Wisdom is truly REAL, as I claim it to be, then there must be som
reason for its existence. Don't you agree?


Brian wrote in the below:

"PROJECTING THEIR VICTORIAN ERA ESOTERIC WORLD-
VIEW BACK ONTO THE HISTORY OF THOUGHT, THE AUTHORS APPEAR
TO BE WOEFULLY DEFICIENT IN UNDERSTANDING THEIR 'OWN' SO-
CALLED INDIAN OR TIBETAN, WTEVER, SACRED TRADITIONS. THE
SPECULATIONS OF THE SO-CALLED MASTERS, ABOUT ANCIENT
EGYPTIAN AND INDIAN THOUGHT, WERE QUITE LIMITED TO THE
INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO HPB AND FRIENDS. THEIR OWN
ESOTERIC STUDIES IN ROSICRUCIANISM, MASONRY AND SPIRITISM
ETC.

My Suflight answer:
The above text of yours also continues, as far as I can understand it your
writing, to put down - the idea of Wisdom Teachings and the existence of
"wisdom" as a issue worth dealing with. There are as far as I am concerned
no reason to put down the search for WISDOM!
But to put down the misuse of Wisdom or something magical Knowledge will be
allright. The manner you do it in - just puts down everything also good and
true Wisdom.

Of course we can agree on the negation "NETI, NETI", as "Not this and Not
that" while dealing with the core of
TRUTH of true wisdom. But to put wisdom teachings down, which contains this
teaching - is according to me to go to far.
The students should be allowed to CULL the GOOD they find in each scripture.
Blavatsky agrees on that in her book The Key to Theosophy.


AND WIDE READING IN RELIGION, HISTORY, PHILOSOPHY AND THE
SCIENCE OF THEIR DAY, WAS ENOUGH TO FORM THE KNOWLEDGE-
BASE EVIDENT IN ALL OF THE MAHATMA LETTERS AND HPB'S BOOKS.
BEYOND THIS INFORMATION, THERE IS NOTHING, NOTHING THERE."

My Sufilight answer:
Yes one might agree with you on the above sentence - if one choses to ignore
the existence OR possible existence of WISDOM in the Teachings of H. P.
blavatsky and her Masters. But I disagree on that. The search for wisdom is
important.
To be blinded by fanatic ignorant stances won't help ones stupidity !
The New Testament Gospels comes to my mind:
Matt.23
[16] Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the
temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple,
he is a debtor!
[17] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple
that sanctifieth the gold?
[19] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that
sanctifieth the gift?
[24] Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
[26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and
platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

John.9
[39] And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which
see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
[40] And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and
said unto him, Are we blind also?
[41] Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now
ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

I guess Brian also find the MASTER Jesus Christ to be a fony of the Jesuits
or the like!
Is that true Brian ?

from
Sufilight with hopefully some words of Wisdom...









----- Original Message -----
From: "brianmuehlbach" <brianmuehlbach@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 10:40 PM
Subject: Theos-World THE REAL QUESTION REG. THE CONCOCTION OF THE MAHATMA
LETTERS IS:.


THE HARE BROTHERS BOOK IS A FIRST ATTEMPT AND EVEN THERE
THEOSOPHISTS DID NO REBUT ALL THE POINTS, JUST SOME)MORE
PORTANT FOR TODAY IS, AND THE QUESTION FOR CALDWELL TO
SHOW PROOF IF HE IS INDEED EXPERT IN THE FIELD. TO BESIDES THE
HARES QUIRKIES ABOUT FRANCE LANGUAGE EXPRESSIONS AND
AMERICAN SLANG IN THE LETTERS THAT STEVE MENTIONS AS
BLAVATSKY'S "TUMBNAIL THAT IS ALL OVEER THE PLACE" THE FACT
REMAINS ALSO
THAT THERE IS NOTHING IN THOSE LETTERS, WHICH COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN PENNED BY HPB AND HER EDUCATED COHORTS. NOTHING.
THE 'WISDOM' IN THEM IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE
AND VISION, POSSESSED AND SEEN BY ANCIENT BEINGS OR AGELESS
BEINGS OUTSIDE OF TIME. IT IS THE INFORMATION / KNOWLEDGE
BASE OF PERSONS WITH A DISTINCT TIME-LIMITED FRAME OF
REFERENCE. PROJECTING THEIR VICTORIAN ERA ESOTERIC WORLD-
VIEW BACK ONTO THE HISTORY OF THOUGHT, THE AUTHORS APPEAR
TO BE WOEFULLY DEFICIENT IN UNDERSTANDING THEIR 'OWN' SO-
CALLED INDIAN OR TIBETAN, WTEVER, SACRED TRADITIONS. THE
SPECULATIONS OF THE SO-CALLED MASTERS, ABOUT ANCIENT
EGYPTIAN AND INDIAN THOUGHT, WERE QUITE LIMITED TO THE
INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO HPB AND FRIENDS. THEIR OWN
ESOTERIC STUDIES IN ROSICRUCIANISM, MASONRY AND SPIRITISM
ETC. AND WIDE READING IN RELIGION, HISTORY, PHILOSOPHY AND THE
SCIENCE OF THEIR DAY, WAS ENOUGH TO FORM THE KNOWLEDGE-
BASE EVIDENT IN ALL OF THE MAHATMA LETTERS AND HPB'S BOOKS.
BEYOND THIS INFORMATION, THERE IS NOTHING, NOTHING THERE.

THEY WERE IN A SENSE MASTERS OF WHATEVER IT WAS THAT HBP
AND FRIENDS HAD MASTERED.....THE WESTERN ESOTERIC 'WISDOM'
OF THEIR TIME. HOWEVER THEY WERE RANK NEOPHYTES WHEN IT
CAME TO MANY THINGS THAT THE MAHATMAS' CLAIMED MASTERY
OF. THUS THE 'MASTERS' SHOULD BE TESTED ON THESE THINGS.
THEY MADE THE CLAIM OF MASTERY, LET THEM EXPLAIN THEMSELVES
DANIEL CALWELL BY PROVIDING TEXTUAL EXAMPLES TO SHOW THIS.


THEY WERE IN A SENSE MASTERS OF WHATEVER IT WAS THAT HBP
AND FRIENDS HAD MASTERED.....THE WESTERN ESOTERIC 'WISDOM'
OF THEIR TIME. HOWEVER THEY WERE RANK NEOPHYTES WHEN IT
CAME TO MANY THINGS THAT THE MAHATMAS' CLAIMED MASTERY
OF. THUS THE 'MASTERS' SHOULD BE TESTED ON THESE THINGS.
THEY MADE THE CLAIM OF MASTERY.

AFTER I MADE THE HARE BROTHER REMARK STEVE MENTIONED THAT
BLAVATSKY'S "TUMBNAIL" STEVE WROTE IS ALL OVE R THE PLACE.
THE NEXT STEP HOWEVER NOW REALLY SHOULD BE AS STEVE NEXT
ALSO WROTE :""There is still one challlenge - more
difficult than collecting preicpitaion stories - which has not been dealt
with: how to argue from an unbiased perspective that the mahatma
letters did contain the actual thoughts of the mahatmas and not those of
the amanuensis chelas who produced them?"

DOUBTFULL DANIEL C. CALDWELL IS CAPABLE EVER REPONDING TO
THIS CHALLENGE. (I AM PLACING THE ABOVE ON MY WEB SITE)
http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehle=
b9

--- In theos-talk@y..., "Daniel H. Caldwell" <comments@b...> wrote:.





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/