Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00079)

Hi. Since you are crosstalking about me without naming me, I will respond to
this message, as I suspect you will not be able to reply, in the spirit of
enquiry, to my message which was made with much love, plus well thought out.
But I hope I am wrong. Maybe you just haven't gotten around to responding
yet.

----- Original Message -----

From: <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: "Terrie Halprin" <thalprin@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 5:19 PM
Subject: Theos-World RE: HPB -- and after her what happens to THEOSOPHY ?


> Dec 30 2002
>
> The IMPORTANCE of THEOSOPHY
>
> After H P B what happens to THEOSOPHY ?
>
> Dear T.
>
> Your reaction to the books or writings by those authors sounds pretty
> much like my own.

>
> H P B is another thing. They have power. I think it is the power of
> veracity.

Wry: Should we believe you? These words are meaningless. What will happen is
someone will decide that you know and then they will believe you, which
seems to be what is intended. This is not only not real verification, but it
also leads to authority, which is the opposite of that. Truth is your body
sitting in the chair, reading this email, in present time. When something
with no opinion sees you, as you are, doing whatever you are doing, this
aligns your little self with what you have called the oversoul. I am not
against anyone reading HPB, but actually, if you don't read her writings at
all, and simply practice the impartial recording of yourself, as you are, in
present time, there is a good chance you or anyone will achieve genuine
spiritual transformation a whole lot faster.
>
> At least, after about 60 years seriously examining their statements, I
> have not been able to fault them. But again, that's just me talking.
> Those are my conclusions, popular or not. Each of us is on their own.

Wry: Then why even give yoiur opinion, unless you want it to slant other
people's opinions in the direction of your opinion. It makes no sense, and
could be interpretated as a kind of double talk. I put new material and
information in my messages. It is a gift.
>
> That's what makes us important to ourselves and to the world -- we
> don't need support and we don't feel it important to be members of a
> herd, or of a senseless crowd that assures us: "you're right,"
> because it KNOWS NO BETTER No. We want to know independently IF WE
> ARE RIGHT.
>
> If you visit a museum and look at the art there -- your reaction is
> either that you like it, or you do not, or, it is so/so. Some people
> have no idea, and no innate basis to rely on -- some find it difficult
> to appreciate perspective, or color harmony -- just as much as many
> who attend the opera do the music halls haven an innate comprehension
> of musical harmony, and are afraid to give an opinion unless it is
> "politically correct." So, like sycophants, they follow the critics,
> and, being overwhelmed by the details of obviously well-advertised
> scholarship, have really nothing to say for themselves. Also they
> feel "hurt" if challenged, and asked to give THEIR reasons.

Wry: This is not Wry, who gives specific reasons, not broad, bland
generalizations, but honestly, who could it be? Think hard. With some it is
all a matter of emotional preference, pretending to be rational. Some want
to be immortal. That ideas FEELS so good. It is likable, but it is an
unverified BELIEF which serves no function, and, as such, is a distraction
from the practice of real brotherhood and genuine spirituality. Various
unsophisticated writings about so called immortality are too bland and broad
and sound like preference in disguise, not true impartiality. It is the soft
white light, not the clear light. Also, along with this kind of
spirituality, there is frequently the practice of grandstanding.

>
> I have seen changes in art, clothing, literary expression, poetry,
> architectural impact, musical appreciation. And the modern
> expressions are mostly cacophony, boisterously misplaced exuberance,
> or, "noise" to me. I don't need to be "excited." I can create my own
> "excitement," and also, I can control it. ( And I am not afraid to
> say so.) But that is so little liked or wanted, I generally keep
> quiet -- on the basis that those who opt for "following-the-leader"
> will eventually find out if it was a true and honest leader or not.
> They won't listen to warnings. [ And I don't think I am so wise
> either. I also say if one lives to be "excited," then one looses one's
> grip over the MIND, and of all my "tools," I value that most because
> it gives me control, and I very much resist any kind of external
> control being attempted to be cast on me. In short I will not permit
> "controlled." -- which "excitement" has a tendency to do.]
>
> I am of the opinion that H P B's writings speak to the kernel of
> things and give good reasons -- at least they seam coherent and
> trustworthy. They seek to present ideas. And in doing that they ask
> for a free evaluation of them. They do not attempt to control. I will
> also add, that while I do not understand everything on first reading,
> if I am patient, I have found that if I set the matter aside for
> future study, I have been eventually satisfied that it is a living
> part of A LIVING WHOLE.
>
> I read another current contributor who, making value judgments from
> appearances and seeming quantitative data, has come to the conclusion
> that "theosophy" is a dying or dwindling affair.

Wry: Actually, I got this information from reading the messages of others on
this list who were recently talking about this subject.
>
> As I see it, Theosophy is unassailable as a statement of FACTS IN
> NATURE. It offers HISTORY and not speculation, nor does it pander to
> any present craze or set of popular opinions. It does not seek
> "adherents." Contrary to popular "excitement, it is very sober -- it
> demands thinkers.
>
> Until that this grasped it will always be a mystery to the
> "fly-by-nights."

Wry: Well, there is one new member on this list who is a hard core ponderer
and a (somewhat) fearless enquirer, and I'm not going anywhere unless I get
kicked off of here, which is what you would like and have already advocated.

>
> Does a University present opportunities for those who want to learn?
> Or is it solely a basis from which graduating students can advertise
> their apparent expertise, and form there claim a larger "starting
> salary" from potential employers? No true scholars or seekers for
> TRUTH are they.

Wry: I'm just doing what it is that a bee does, which is always original..
You just don't know how to recognize it. You are attempting, again and
again, to create states in people, but truth is not a state, and eternalism
is a state of mind that is STAGNANT and not alive, whether you say it is
alive or not.

>
> Another observation is in regard to University offerings. Dom they
> invariably present the highest standard of knowledge? Are they
> impartial?

Wry: The implication is that you are. But who is to know unless a specific
method for becoming actually impartial is implemented. The truth is that no
ones becomes impartial by hit and miss, but this is what you are advocating/

<Do they encourage and nurture independent study, even when
> it may be contrary (or deviant) from accepted norms and values ?

Wry: Do you?

<Does
> it encourage learning and work without the imposition of the teacher'
> s standards or "hobby-horses?"

Wry: Do you?

<Are existent theories or hypotheses
> allowed to be seriously challenged? is the challenger given a free
> platform? And, given encouragement to break down or to modify the
> basis of considerations that has hitherto prevailed? Is there true
> academic freedom there?

Wry: And we will see if such is the case with theosophy. When I first came
on here, I thought that all theosophists had eternalistic beliefs like you,
and it is true that many do, but not all. In the case of theosophy, I was
wrong about the message I made to Paul about the karma of interfering with
people's beliefs, after being on this list for a while, I have only very
recently come to understand that it is the duty of a true theosophist to
enquire and discover, and, I now see it is for the greater good, to address
you honestly, and not be afraid of hurting your feelings or arousing your
anger.

>
> Where is TRUTH to be had ?
>
> Well, see what you can make of this. I say THEOSOPHY demands inquiry,
> free and pertinent, always. In the KEY TO THEOSOPHY (HPB) -- p.
> 271 -- on Education, H P B wrote: "we should aim at creating free
> men and women, free intellectually, free morally, unprejudiced in all
> respects, and above all things unselfish." I think that is a pretty
> good objective.

Wry: If you think enquiry is a good idea, then lets do it and not just talk
about it. You should try to encourage that atmosphere on this list rather
than discourage it, and I will do the same. Sincerely, Wry


>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dal
>
> ===================
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thalprin
> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:27 AM
> To:
> Subject: HPB and after her THEOSOPHY -- is of what value ?
>
> Dear Dallas,
>
> Thank you for the very fine suggestion to read the works of these
> authors AND make me own assessments. But, truth is, in all likelihood
> I just can't bring myself to read their books.
>
> Over the years I've probably seen most of their titles, and, it is
> always the same - I pick up the book, check the table of contents,
> scan a few chapters for relative infos AND within a few minutes at
> most I always just wanna put those books down.
>
> A. A. B's materials seem kind of religious to me and it is this
> feeling
> of her prescribing one's "daily life" that I find grating. And,
> Leadbeater, he creeps me out. I just hear that guy's name and I feel
> lucky! Helena Roerich, really, I never get passed her photos, she
> reminds me of the lady DeVille for 101 Dalmatians - she freaks me
> out! And, I always think: "Man! I wouldn't wanna run into her on a
> dark road at night"! Olcott, I never know who he is, and, I'm never
> sure what he's actually saying or talking about. Krishnamurti, well,
> that whole situation just makes me too sad.
>
> The thing I like about HPB's works is that there is clear minded and
> relative information on each and every page. She did very well
> combine/solidify/cross-correlate maths, philosophy, mythology,
> science, language, history and symbol. These are the subjects that
> are of interest to me AND I am not much interested in
> agendas/pursuits bent of another nature of understanding nor single
> focus/insight or inclination. I think/feel that HPB's materials are
> a worldly, enlightening and unbiased resource AND that what she has
> written is in fact a tremendous accumulation of reason and wisdom AND
> quite a respectable gift to have accomplished/offered on up - it's an
> inspiration, even today. So, it's useful and it's practical, abiding
> as value does AND when I look in her eyes I see a seeker of truth AND
> I feel wisdom, trial and love. When I read her works I see/feel
> understanding and experience AND the effort/search to be as open and
> honest, thorough and direct as one can possibly be.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> T
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>